The Conservative Rainbow

Status of My Blogs "The Conservative Rainbow" & "The Objectivist Chronicle"

2011-05-17T18:21:00.003-04:00

I am going to be putting to "sleep" The Conservative Rainbow for awhile. I'm not deleting this blog in case I want to come back to it in the future. I will only be maintaining, actively, The Objectivist Chronicle. I will probably wait a few months from the date of this post before I put to sleep this blog. I want visitors who come here to be able to find me over at my other blog, The Objectivist Chronicle. Please feel free--if you follow me here through Google or some other "Follow" mechanism--to follow me at The Objectivist Chronicle. I have widgets there as well. If you follow me on Facebook you may have already read this posted as a note there. I may retain my political email: proudgayconserv@aol.com simply because it gets to be quite the hassle switching things around.

I have come to realize of late that I can no longer, in good conscience, uphold Conservatism. Until Conservatism (if it ever had any meaning as a label) goes back to meaning individual freedom and the maintenance of individual liberty as opposed to the promotion of the supremacy of religious ideology through the force of law over the mind of man, then I will no longer promote it. Thomas Jefferson stated:

I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

There are religious people in this country who want to impose their religious beliefs on others legislatively. That is also a form of big government.  To share a popular philosophical and Objectivist saying, in the realm of Reason which is absolute, "You cannot have your cake and eat it too." Various religions and their sects are man-made and they are not always grounded in truth or reason, therefore, that means all attempts of legislating their supremacy over the mind of man, is the attempt of one man to impose his will forcefully on another. I can no longer condone that, support it, or sanction it...because it is evil. Men are accountable as individuals and there are ways to improve society through voluntary means which maintains man's freedom as well as his sovereignty over his own mind and body. We have become a nation of cannibals--cannibals feeding on people's minds, bodies, and souls. This needs to stop if we are to remain free.

It has been suggested to me by various followers in the past, either on this blog or over at Facebook--that my promotion of various attitudes which allow people to privately contract with others in regards to medical decisions they wish to make for themselves or others--will eventually lead to things like eugenics, mass slaughter, or collectivist evil. This is nonsense. A private contract is a private contract. If it is made between two individuals and the government does not stick its nose into the process (which ultimately is where many of our legal problems and overly legislated society come from)--then there is absolutely no need to believe, if the government is not involved, that those private contracts would lead to those collectivist evils. That is a ridiculous notion. Collectivism has sprung from secular and religious societies alike down through history; Soviet Russia sprang from extremely mystical traditions which upheld religious, altruistic notions. There have also been nations which had secular societies which sprouted collectivist evil. The problem springs from false premises people maintain in regards to what their duties are and are not in regards to their relationship with their fellow citizens. Not to mention, laissez-faire capitalism is based on the notion of private contracts between two parties. Only the people involved in that contract need to be concerned--and no one else. When they have a dispute it is up to the courts to decide objectively how to settle the dispute based on the legal contract which was signed by both parties.

Which, by the way, brings me to another point about the degradation of our society--the inability to mind our own Goddamn business. And in this, news anchors, the mass media, politicians and unscrupulous lawyers looking to make an easy buck are all culpable. When someone has decided to have a no-resuscitate rule upheld legally should they become unable to live their life in a manner that is productive and dignified to a human being--we do not need to hear for weeks on end from endless parades of busy bodies why what they did was wrong, right, and every shade in-between. If that's what they wanted--and it was contracted privately and legally--it doesn't matter to anyone one else.

It has also been suggested to me by others that a society not grounded in religious ideology (a theocracy--because that's exactly what it would be), would also lead to the outcomes I mentioned above. That is also ridiculous. If we maintain separations between Church and State, Economics and State, Science and State, and Education and State and return to limiting the government to its proper foundations--none of the above fear-mongering by those with other agendas (those who want to institute their economic or religious collectivist beliefs onto others) is remotely possible. We have only had peaceful co-existence among various religious faiths in this country to the extent that the government has kept its nose out of playing legislative favorites with one faith over another. Although, that is quickly becoming a problem too.

If the Tea Party and the Republicans fail in their mission to restore laissez-fair capitalism and freedom to this nation it will be because they decided to uphold religious ideology over economic and social freedom as well as continuing to promote the evil of altruism as a method by which to deal with others. Those are the causes. Our destruction will be the effect.

I am opposed to the secular, immoral, collectivism of the Left which is grounded in subjectivism and I am opposed to anyone on the Religious Right who supports collectivist, theocratic notions which deal with people in a forceful manner. Men can only remain free when they choose to deal with each other as equal, sovereign individuals in a voluntary manner. If you have a moral issue with particual actions people take then you have the freedom to go out and privately promote what you think is morally best and provide an arena to people who want a different option--and let the free market of ideas take care of the rest. Just keep your organization's nose away from busy-body politicians. They will sour your organization more quickly than anything else. The good will always win out when that is upheld as a standard.

I will no longer sanction the ridiculous growth of our government beyond its bounds of protection of individual freedom via the attempt to throw a legislative noose around my neck making me economically responsible for other people. Justice requires and demands that men are treated and dealt with as individuals...not as some pawn in a game to make others feel justified in their religious beliefs or their beliefs that they are owed something by society. A free society owes you nothing other than what you work to gain for yourself and those whom you value.

I will continue to work voraciously to uphold economic freedom from the dictates of the Left. I am also going to branch out my work into exposing organized religion's ties to the government, politicians, and economics. They want to use such devices to impose their religious morality on everyone else. Organized religion is a form of collectivist doctrine which I will also no longer condone as long as it is attempting to impose its will on others. Religion does, at times, run parallel and can discover the same truths which philosophy does. Religion was (is) ultimately a primitive form of philosophy. However, many times religion seeks to uphold things which are not only in conflict with man's freedom and the good but actively help to undermine man's freedom and which help to support evil; whether it is intentional or by default--means little. The result is the same: tyranny.

I am dedicated to man's freedom. I deal with others voluntarily as I expect them to deal with me. I will not promote, sanction, or help evil in its purposes to subvert this free nation from it's philosophical moorings grounded in individual freedom.

If you are religious and on my friend list I welcome you to stay if you see the truth in my words above. If you do not, then you are welcome to leave with my blessings. Just know this--I will no longer bend to politically correct language and parse my words for the sake of sparing people's feelings. I'm done with being afraid to speak the truth. This nation will not survive if we are concerned about people's feelings while hiding behind politically correct language which does an extraordinary disservice to those who seek to understand man, his place in the universe, and the philosophical principles which must be maintained in order to retain his freedom.

Thank you,

Christopher Budden

Freedom of Religion: Fine Until Thine Is Supposed To Become Mine

2011-05-11T21:17:00.000-04:00

The other day I walked by a parked car in a parking lot that had the following bumper sticker: Freedom of Religion Means Any Religion. Now, I certainly don't know the owner of this car's specific intentions behind posting this bumper sticker. However, that phrase has been used to justify appeasement and toleration of Islamic extremists and their beliefs within our free nation. We can see what that type of appeasement has brought to other Western countries...and it's not good. Islamic women have been murdered in once (mostly) free Western countries all in the name of Shariah Law being upheld. This should not be happening in free countries. Incidentally, this is what makes the Left so unbelievable wrong on this entire topic (like they are on most other things).

The Left complains when the Ten Commandments appear in a courthouse--but they are entirely willing to allow Islamists in our country go ahead and murder their daughters and wives because they looked at them the wrong way. Ayn Rand once stated in regards to contradictions:

Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.

As an Objectivist, I'm dedicated to reason and it's application to governance, interpersonal relationships, science, education, etc...basically, any way in which it can help us out from under the collectivist yoke towards which we are slipping. And I am whole-heartedly dedicated to individual freedom. For me, that means, not only economic freedom, but freedom of conscience as well. I have my own particular views on religion and I'm no longer ashamed to admit I've moved beyond them. I was raised Evangelical Lutheran and later on I studied Paganism and Buddhism. It is not that I don't ponder God or the possibility of an afterlife, but I have found it to be completely irrelevant in regards to the discussion of maintaining individual freedom. Politics is contentious to begin with but then when you mix faith into the discussion it becomes ten times worse--and that much more confusing. Ayn Rand state of religion:

Philosophy is the goal toward which religion was only a helplessly blind groping. The grandeur, the reverence, the exalted purity, the austere dedication to the pursuit of truth, which are commonly associated with religion, should properly belong to the field of philosophy.

And:

Religion is a primitive form of philosophy, the attempt to offer a comprehensive view of reality.

I realize, writing this on a Conservative blog could be construed as offensive. I don't mean it that way. However, the truth is, most religions are just that--they are man's attempt at trying to find someway to explain his existence, his role in it, how he deals with others and what his moral guidance should be. Accept, morality and ethics are the science of how they are applied to the decisions individuals make. The moment you "collectivize" an ethical system, it no longer supports the individual; it supports a collective ideology.

If you've ever heard the statement, "The freedom to swing your fist ends where the other guys nose begins," you will understand my point regarding those who are so eager to allow dangerous, extremist, and theocratic ideologies to start dictating to our legal system as Islam has done in other Western countries. Freedom of the individual is absolutely incompatible with religious doctrine that says, "You must think this, do this, or you are considered an infidel."

The freedom to practice a religion ends where the other guys religion begins--or in the case of atheists--doesn't begin. I'm an enormous advocate of separation of Church and State--not in the sort of muddled way in which some people promote this notion, but, in an actual separation between Church and State. As wonderful as our Founding Fathers were, they left some things entirely too open to interpretation. One only has to ponder the economic mess this country is in to know that is true.

I have seen this bumper sticker as well:

I understand the purpose behind this bumper sticker. But, when you really think about it--I mean really think about it--how ridiculous is this? Adherents to every one of these faiths believes their faith is superior, their faith is the one and only truth, their faith is the morality to be followed; not only does that breed vast amounts of subjectivism (just what collectivist evil needs to feed off of) but how do you begin to have a discussion when you can't even decide whose is the right one to follow? Now think about that previous statement of mine above: their faith is the morality to be followed. That doesn't exactly smell of individual liberty now does it? Oh--did I find another contradiction?

If you are a free individual who fully understands all that is supposed to mean--how do you "coexist" with a religion that tells you if you don't follow us you are an infidel and deserve to have your head hacked off? Putting Islam aside for a moment, how do any of these religions in the coexist bumper sticker even begin to have a conversation as to what's rational? The Jews don't see Jesus as anything other than a prophet. The Christians view Jesus as the Son of God. The Buddhists "live" to deny reality by blanking out their minds to find "bliss" rather than facing reality as it is in order to maintain their life. The Pagans will find and use any former God or Goddess to suit their particular psychological needs of the moment while claiming the planets and their positions influence our behavior. The Islamists still haven't had a "reformation" which is a nice way of saying Islam hasn't "injected some logic and reason into the faith" so they can do what they have to do as human beings to live and maintain their lives free of oppression!

Collectivists live via their emotions, faith is an emotion. Emotions are barometers which guage your relationship to existence--they can inform you when you are on a good path or a bad path. But, they don't tell you anything about reality in particular. "Hope" does not make something true. "Hate" does not make something wrong--it can make something good if you hate the right thing. Love does not apply to your abuser--at least not if you have an ounce of self-respect and self-esteem.

Buddhists = Hoping violent people don't exist won't make them not exist as something you need to defend against in the here and now.

Islamists = Denying half of your populations talent pool (women) from being able to lead normal, creative lives contributing to your existence won't pull your nations out of the Middle Ages muck in which they are currently mired.

Pagans = No matter which way the stars are aligned the decision still has to be yours to get your ass out of bed every morning and be productive, get to work, and support yourself--no matter how many spells you cast, circles you dance around, or money trees you create. It's still ultimately up to you.

Christians = Dump the altruism! This one concept of "sacrifice as the good" has done more damage and spread more evil across the planet than can even be counted! Learn to promote the notion of trade between peoples instead. Altruism is evil. Trade is justice. There's a reason modern day churches and even the Catholic Church is getting in on the "social justice" bandwagon--because altruism teaches them it's the right thing to do!

If people really want to support individual freedom--then they have to find a means to do it that is consistent in its support of the individual, non-contradictory in it's support of individuals to make their own decisions which support their life, and is a rational basis for understanding and maintaining human freedom.

Ultimately, I don't give a damn what you believe privately--but, unfortunately we are now in a position in this country where we have to begin acknowledging that what we may believe privately has been directly contributing to our problems. Cause and effect. Ideas have consequences--even ideas we may hold subconsciously. To end this post:

It has often been noted that a proof of God would be fatal to religion: a God susceptible of proof would have to be finite and limited; He would be one entity among others within the universe, not a mystic omnipotence transcending science and reality. What nourishes the spirit of religion is not proof, but faith, i.e., the undercutting of man’s mind.

...and I would add...man's freedom.

BREAKING: Usama Bin Laden Is Dead

2011-05-01T23:34:00.001-04:00

Usama bin Laden is dead, sources say. From FOX News:

Usama bin Laden is dead, multiple sources confirm to Fox News. He was killed a week ago by a U.S. bomb.

President Obama is expected to deliver a statement from the White House Sunday night to discuss the major development.

The announcement comes nearly a decade after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks which started a tireless hunt for the terrorist mastermind and Al Qaeda leader.

The U.S. had been waiting for the results of a DNA test to confirm his identity before going public. Sources said the vice president informed congressional leaders late Sunday night that bin Laden had indeed been killed

From the Capitalist Pig's Mouth

2011-04-21T17:41:00.010-04:00

Many of you may see Jonathan Hoenig from time to time as a commentator on the FOX News Channel (I know--those damn "fascists" over at FOX News!). He recently gave this speech at the Chicago Tax Day Tea Party in Daley Plaza. He states:

The basic problem with the government today isn't that the programs are inefficient or that politicians can't work together or even that the controls haven't been implemented in the right way. The real problem...is that the government has the wrong role in our lives!

Despite the fact that the Democrats for the last 100 years have blatantly turned from American freedom towards Marxist ideology not recognized by only the most useful of idiots, both parties would have us believe that our problems stem from not "pushing the right buttons and pulling the right levers" in regards to the economy. I've said many times before (because it's true) that no nation is a free nation that does not have a free capitalistic economy; not a little capitalism, not some controls, not some weird mix of statism and capitalism such as the Chinese now have. Statism is statism--whether it is a little bit--or a lot. And it's like a virus; once it becomes airborne, statism spreads like wildfire.

America was the first country in the history of the world whose Founders intended to provide for a government whose role was not to be "mommy" or "daddy." Government cannot be "mommy" or "daddy" unless through legislative force (the equivalent to a gun to your head if you don't comply) they steal from one person to give to another. That is immoral. That is why the Soviet Union was called the "Evil Empire," that's why Pol Pot murdered thousands of people, that's why Hitler (a socialist) wanted to create his Aryan racial Utopia. The Left, is the Left, is the Left. They have never changed. They will never change. The Founders warned us in many of their writings about the collectivist Left gaining power. From The 5000 Year Leap by Skousen:

Since the genius of the American system is maintaining the eagle in the balanced center of the spectrum [I have issues with this particular view of the political spectrum but let's stipulate], the Founders warned against a number of temptations which might lure subsequent generations to abandon their freedoms and their rights by subjecting themselves to a strong federal administration operating on the collectivist Left.

They warned against the 'welfare state' where the government endeavors to take care of everyone from the cradle to the grave. Jefferson wrote:

If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy. (Bergh, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, 10:342.)

They warned against confiscatory taxation and deficit spending. Jefferson said it was immoral for one generation to pass on the results of it's extravagance in the form of debts to the next generation. He wrote: "...we shall all consider ourselves unauthorized to saddle posterity with our debts, and morally bound to pay them ourselves; and consequently within what may be deemed the period of a generation, or the life (expectancy) of the majority." (Ibid., 13:358.)

Every generation of Americans struggled to pay off the national debt up until the present one.

The Founders also warned that the only way for the nation to prosper was to have equal protection of 'rights,' and not allow the government to get involved in trying to provide equal distribution of 'things.' [If it were up to me, I would add an Amendment to the Constitution as suggested in Atlas Shrugged beginning, "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of production and trade..."] They also warned against the pooling of property as advocated by the proponents of communism. Samuel Adams said they had done everything possible to make the ideas of socialism and communism unconstitutional [apparently not enough]. Said he:

The Utopian schemes of leveling (re-distribution of the wealth) and a community of goods (central ownership of the means of production and distribution), are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the Crown. (These ideas) are arbitrary, despotic, and, in our government, unconstitutional. (William V. Wells, The Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, 3 vols. [Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1865], 1:154

[Brackets are my words.]

So, yes, we have the collectivist Left. But, part of our problem has also been the Republican leadership which accepts the same notion about the purpose of government which the Left does: that it is "mommy" and "daddy." We don't have a two-party system; we have a one-party system with two sides who simply quibble over how to manage, administer, and hold the gun to the public's head. As Ayn Rand so clearly showed, collectivism is not just a phenomenon of the Left. It lives on the Right as well. The collectivist Left simply wants their collectivist, secular materialism to satiate their driving need for a long-dead Utopian vision which the scientific fact of the supremacy of the individual makes impossible to create or maintain. The collectivist Right's religious notions propagate the idea that altruism, for religious reasons, is a moral idea (this isn't limited to Christianity either--many religions hold this view). Rand said, "Hold on. There's a third path morality--one of trade between people. Trade remains moral. Collectivism, because it must be done by force through a third party, is immoral (which is, inherently, why it always collapses into misery, death and destruction.) Most people view charity as a virtue, giving something away for nothing; they model themselves after Mother Theresa, Jesus, Buddha. Perhaps we should go so far as to stop calling charities--"charities." Name them something different based on the concept of trade. This would go a long way in helping to beat back entitlement mentality. Charity and altruism demands sacrifice by the party giving and it diminishes the human dignity of the person receiving. Why should one party sacrifice and the other party be diminished when you can avoid either one of those evils by trading? I would argue, even private charities, funded by private donations, should promote the notion that some kind of return on the investment of the help they give becomes necessary to continue receiving the assistance. There are very, very few people who are completely incapable of providing for at least some of what is required to maintain their existence--and that small percentage can even be managed through private, voluntary assistance. It is very important Americans begin to understand philosophical definitions so we can define what we are talking about and not be led by evil, misinformed, or the philosophically ignorant down the path to destruction. That's the only way to fight the premises which are killing this country.

Jonathan states:

What we should fight for is the type of Tea Party that the Founding Fathers stood for--the original Tea Partiers; not just try to preserve the parental entitlement-state with a better Excel sheet. Let's be a Tea Party! Do you want to be a NeoCon Party? Do you want to be a Green Party? Do you want to be a New Deal Party? Do you want to be a Religious Right Party? Let's be a Tea Party! Those other parties are over! Those are the parties that got us into the mess that we're in today!

We're are not a Communist nation. We are not a theocratic nation. Now, I don't believe that Federalism gives particular states the right to trample on individual freedoms either. Bear with my ridiculous suggestion which follows while I make a point: if all the Catholics in the country want to get together, move to one of the states, and turn that state into a bastion of pro-life legislation--then have at it! Go for it! If the secular Left all want to move to California and attempt their Utopian experiment in Utopian living--then have at it! Go for it! At least, in that scenario, particular ways of living are not forced on the entire nation and the states can be what the Founders intended them to be: petry dishes for experiments by the people to see what might work and what might not work.

It is not the Federal Government's job to legislate people's consciences, manipulate their money to redistribute to other people, or play the nation's citizens, one against the other, by playing favorites in regards to how they treat one group of people over another group of people. A Republic is limited and defined by it's constitution. Voting is only for the purposes of operating within that limited sphere of protecting the people's rights. There is no other purpose. The federal government is not to be used to push a particular religious ideology; it is not to be used to steal from one person to give to another; it is not to be used for politicians to engage in crony capitalism (fascism) in which they buddy up with business leaders and dole out favors to those businesses thereby helping to keep them in power while the everyday Joe gets the shaft; it is not to be used to provide people with a public education which then, of course, has governmental standards to be met (really think about the danger in that, just for one second); it is not to be used to provide people with cars, homes, healthcare, or any other commodity which politicians can dream up to hand out.

If people of a particular conscience hold a view over any particular issue and they want to make headway in promoting that view then they should not be doing it by lobbying (Rand's word was pull-peddlers--those who seek favors from the government) politicians who will force others to live up to that view via the legislative gun to the head. They should do it by utilizing private, persuasive (not legislatively forceful) organizations which help promote those views on a local or state level. End of story.

Our government is the Leviathan it is because everyone has come to believe they have a right to cannibalize other people; whether it is to cannibalize the conscience of another person or cannibalize the hard earned labor of a person makes no difference. It's the same issue...one of tyrannical premises held by people who want to control others for their own ends.

There are no such things as "for the good of society," or the "safety of the herd." There is only the right of the individual to exist for his own sake, as master of his own conscience, using the fruits of his own labor to live the life he believes best serves his needs. No one else has anything to say about it. You are your own person, with your own thoughts, dreams, wishes, and aspirations; even if your dream is to sit around and destroy your life abusing drugs and alcohol and have perverse, dangerous sex--that is your right to do so. But, it is not my responsibility, as an individual in my own right--to pay for your stupidity. Does life occasionally throw a hardball in someone's direction who may have done nothing to deserve it? Absolutely. However, that still does not put a moral noose around my neck, or anyone else's neck, which necessarily makes me, or others, responsible for you. No man is a slave.

Enough is enough! I happily join Jonathan in his sentiments.

Addendum: Correction For My Review of Atlas Shrugged: Part 1

2011-04-20T01:11:00.004-04:00

I made a statement of error in my review of Atlas Shrugged: Part 1. I mention how the producers did not include the scene from the novel regarding the back-story of The Twentieth Century Motor Company. Hank and Dagny do go to see Ivy Starnes in Part 1 of the novel. She is one of the three heirs to the Starnes Motor Company who drove it into the ground with their "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" plan. However, Dagny is not told the actual story of what happened until Part 2 of the novel where she runs into a former employee who fills her in on what happened exactly. For some reason, I always equate the visit to Ivy Starnes' home by Hank and Dagny as having happened after Dagny hears the story of what happened.

Either way, the visit to Ivy Starnes' home, having occurred in Part 1 as the producers correctly portrayed, still contains wonderful dialogue between Hank and Dagny and Ivy which is very revealing. It's still a shame they had to cut that sequence down to a mere single sentence. On the flip-side, this means there's still hope that they will include a flash-back sequence portraying what actually happened with the factory in Part 2!

I just wanted to clear that up. I don't like putting out incorrect information and I try my best to correct it when I can!

My Review of "Atlas Shrugged: Part 1"

2011-04-18T00:16:00.004-04:00

Note: Since Atlas Shrugged is a mystery you may want to reserve reading this until you read the book--if you plan on reading the book.

Just to make things easy, my grading scale:

A = 100%

B = 90%

C = 80%

I want to give it an A. I can't.

I want to give it a C. I can't.

Here's my problem. Atlas Shrugged changed my life. It completely changed the way I view the world, what I feel is necessary to save America, and how I view myself and my relationship to other human beings. We all know what road America is headed down--and it's not good. If it keeps going this way, I'm absolutely convinced we will go down the same road as other Republics throughout history--complete destruction.

We need something to save freedom and this nation; Ayn Rand believed it was philosophy. I do as well. Were many of the Founders Christian and of the faithful? Yes. Are we a theocracy? No. People must be left to make mistakes on their own sometimes--no matter how morally reprehensible we may find them. People's mistakes are on their consciences as individuals and they must live with them as individuals and be judged as individuals. I, frankly, love Ayn's view that the proper moral code really should be to "judge, lest ye be judged" rather than "judge not, lest ye be judged." The former is hinged to Reason, the latter is not. Part of freedom though is changing people's minds and educating through persuasion to be better people and guardians of freedom--self-regulators. Beating each other over the head with legislation, in part, has gotten us where we are. We have always had harmony among religions in this country because of separation of Church and State. Many people think the solution to our problems is getting the country back to our "religious roots." The next question that must follow that is...whose religious roots? There are all kinds of religions, all kinds of faiths, and people of no faith. Different denominations. Faith is personal and it's different for everyone. Everyone thinks they're particular view is the most special and is the one to be pushed to the forefront. That's subjective. "Subjective" separates people. Only objectivity can unite. What does that leave us? We need something which is the same for everyone based on solid, proven, consistent principles down through the ages that have been with us since Plato and Aristotle first began discussing these things if not earlier? Philosophy.

On to the movie. This is extremely difficult for me to review.

I could review this movie as a person that has read Ayn Rand's novels, I have absorbed Objectivism fully and I understand it conceptually (though there is always learning to be done--in no way am I claiming expertise). I understand the characters and I went into seeing this movie with all of that background rattling around in my head. Because of all that background, the characters in this film spoke to me. They really did. But, I also knew why they were acting, or not acting, the way they were. Due to that, it was an emotional experience for me. I was revolted at Hank's family's dismissal of his achievements and their looting attitude towards the sacred well from which his creative efforts sprung. I sympathized with Dagny and her struggle against her brother who is destroying her family's company with his backstabbing, hand-holding with Washington, D.C. cronies who are trying to make things better--by making things worse. Tears rolled down my face when Dagny and Hank ran the John Galt Line. I shuddered to my core when, upon discovering that yet another one of her life-lines has disappeared, Dagny screams in horror and frustration at what she witnesses. It really, really was an excellent effort and if it gets more people to start studying philosophy and / or Ayn Rand's developments--then this movie will have succeeded. That is the part of me that wants to give this movie an A.

Now, the part of me that wants to give this movie a C. The entire time I was watching I was thinking, "Do the people in this theatre who have never read the novel--even remotely understand what it is they're watching? Do they get it?" To be honest, the movie felt rushed to me. It felt like they were trying to cram 20 lbs. of potatoes into a 5 lb. bag. One hour and 40 minutes--give or take? Why the short time? This movie should have reached at least 2 to 2 1/2 hours. I can forgive the lack of exposition in regards to the characters and their backgrounds. I'm not sure if the time constraint was financial or deliberate. I don't know if we'll ever know. However, in a day and age where we have seen movies hit the 2-2 1/2 if not close to 3 hour marks--why was this cut short?

I wanted to see the railway workers from the union come to support Dagny in her effort to run the John Galt Line--despite the possible danger involved. I realize that some of the lengthy speeches by the characters in the novel would not translate well to the screen. But, if you have good writers, and I certainly believe they did, they could have edited some of those words down in order to pass some more explicit philosophy on to the audience.

Aside from the philosophy, Atlas Shrugged is also a mystery. The insertion of the shadowy figure of John Galt into the picture, I believe, gives too much away entirely too soon. He does appear early in the novel, but you don't know it's him due to the way Rand treated his conversations with other characters.

I also felt the run-up to Hank and Dagny's affair felt rushed. The affairs between Ayn Rand's characters have always been a source of particular irritation to people of faith--those who believe morality is something handed down from somewhere outside of yourself--to be obeyed without the attachment of thought or Reason. Most people, on the surface, would classify this affair as a "sin." Is it? Why do these two find themselves at this point? What kinds of "blanked out" areas of Hank's mind lead him to discover someone with whom he shares many values in common? Hank's relationship with his wife is obviously cold from her end. Lillian treats Hank as though it is his duty to make her happy. Love is not a duty. If you're in a relationship in which you feel like maintaining it is your duty--you have issues which need to be worked out. So, with that in mind--is he sinning? Or is his mind beginning to realize how he is allowing himself to be sacrificed to Lillian's cold expectations. Does the sin really lie in the fact that he's allowing himself to be sucked dry emotionally and spiritually by Lillian? Self-esteem. That's what his real sin is; allowing his self-esteem to be sacrificed. Anytime Ayn puts her characters in these positions, she is exploring the mind-body connection. Most people believe love is impervious to Reason. That is a fallacy. And it is a fallacy that is extremely dangerous in regards to human freedom, health and happiness. It is also why the Liberal notion of "loving everybody" is so inherently and hopelessly misguided. To say you love everyone--reduces love to a duty. How do you love the man who just murdered your family? How do you love irrational men who's goal is to enslave others to a tyrannical way of life through something like Shariah Law? Answer: You can't. Not if you have an ounce of self-esteem. And forgiveness is not the same as love. More generally, I do think the movie would have benefitted from developing some of the relationships more deeply.

One of my biggest disappointments was the practical elimination of the story-within-a-story of the Twentieth Century Motor Company. The Twentieth Century Motor Company's demise was directly attributable to the promotion of Karl Marx's "from each man according to his ability to each man according to his needs" dictum put in place by the children of the father who ran the company prior to turning it over to them. In the novel, Ayn relay's this story through a former employee of the company. It is done with such skill. Reading that story was the among the first things that really solidified for me why collectivism cannot work. Hank and Dagny run across Ivy Starnes in her home in the novel sitting among Buddhist statues and smelling of incense all the while bemoaning the fact that humanity is not good enough to practice Marx's so-called "code of morality." In the movie we see Ivy for a brief moment when she simply exclaims, "My father was an evil man." Her father was the one who ran the company with competence. His children, upon taking over the company, tried to "equalize" everyone--the fruits of which ended up turning people against each other. At the very least, this deserved a flash-back sequence.

On to the performances. I must say--this is the one area I had the least problems with. I thought Taylor Schilling did an excellent job of passing on the feeling that this is a woman who is determined to keep things running despite all those around her who are attempting to bring her down. She seemed purposeful, intent and relayed that quite well. Grant Bowler's Rearden was excellent. The scene where he gives Lillian the bracelet and his mother talks about how another man would have "given his wife a diamond bracelet; for her pleasure, not his"--the look of disbelief on his face at his mother's words are just subtle enough so that you know on the one hand he's irritated, yet on the other hand he's completely mystified by their reactions. Another stellar moment Bowler gives is when he exclaims, "...it's mine. Do you understand that concept? Mine." His subtlety at this point in Part 1 is appropriate. As a character, Hank is still trying to figure out himself and the world of destruction around him. He has just the right amount of incredulousness mixed with the right amount of determination. Rebecca Wisotsky makes a perfect Lillian. Her cold expectations of her husband bring to light the vile, spiritual vampire which makes Lillian the wife you love to hate. Matthew Marsden is an entirely different kind of looter--he's miserable, without purpose, and really excels at pouring on the nihilistic, psychological universe in which James Taggart lives. Nothing matters. I chuckled to myself when he says to Phillip Reardon, Hank's brother, "Who the hell are you?" It's no secrect that among collectivists--many times they despise each other. Francisco? So far, Jsu Garcia is making an excellent playboy...or is he? The mystery to what he is about is still well-preserved, as it should be at this point.

All in all, if you're one who has read the book--you probably enjoyed it immensely, much as I described in my "give it an A paragraph." If you haven't--you may have left somewhat confused, but with your curiosity peaked.

I have high hopes for Parts 2 and 3 and look forward to seeing them made. But, for now--I give Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 a B minus.

Defund It, Denounce It, Destroy It

2011-04-05T21:20:00.001-04:00

No government has and no government ever will be able to micromanage its citizenry into this glorious Utopian dream which the modern day, malcontent, Leftist hacks in control of the Democrat Party cannot seem to give up; in fact, collectivism still has avid proponents all across the globe. As we've seen, even the Islamic Fundamentalists can, for a time, join forces with their socialist comrades--if it means achieving anything resembling the tyrannical ends towards which they both dream--at which point, the Islamists will be more than happy to hack of the heads of their secular, socialist brethren once power is attained and a fully collectivist theocratic state can be installed world-wide. Or...vice versa--maybe the socialists will win out and once they are in power they will put the theocratic tyrants to the gas chambers.

This is the mentality of collectivists down through history--a bunch of whiny, malcontent, psychotically driven babies with an inverted, perverted, upside-down damaged view of the world and an anger at those whose love for individual freedom will not give them everything they feel they deserve.

Such is the misguided push for socialized medicine. Once a government controls your body--then they have you. And that's the whole reason the Leftist Democrats push for socialized medicine--it is their last stand in order to attempt to win that final battle cry--who believe government can provide you with everything you've ever dreamed of. Thus have been the fates of all Republics through history.

It doesn't matter that in order for any government to be able to provide anyone with anything--they first have to confiscate it from someone else.

Will the Republicans be able to pull of repealing this massive, mess? Terrence P. Jeffrey at CNS News says in his article GOP Budget Proposal: 'Not a Penny' for Obamacare:

The problems with this approach are already popping up all over the country,” says the proposal. “Health care costs continue to escalate relentlessly. The new law has aggravated the worst aspects of the U.S. health care system, without fixing what was broken. The country needs to move away from this centralized system, not towards it.

He's exactly right. This is the one thing our mentally challenged, binky-sucking babies on the Left never seem to get through their thick skulls (either because they really are that stupid or are so ideological it doesn't matter if they did understand it): whenever government sticks its fingers into a particular sector of the economy--it distorts the market in that sector of the economy--and prices go up. The reason modern day health care is so expensive is precisely because of all the government involvement we currently have in the system. But, for the Left--it's not about economic reality--it's about satiating their need to: 1) satisfy their 'compassionate' urges or 2) simply prove individualists wrong. Either way--it all boils down to an unwillingness to deal with reality as it is and not the way they wish it to be. If it means destroying every virtue, freedom, an medical career in the process--then so be it. They all be long gone by the time the consequences of their actions come to full fruition.

Help Find Michelle Malkin's Cousin, Marizela Perez

2011-03-17T19:19:00.000-04:00

As many of you may or may not know, Michelle Malkin's cousin has gone missing. She lived in Seattle. Please go to www.findmarizela.com to see more information about her. Let's help Michelle locate her family member. Please help pass the website around to as many people as you can!

Thank you.

Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 - The Preview Now Showing

2011-02-11T18:01:00.002-05:00

Less than an hour ago the preview for Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 was finally released. You can go to the official website to view the trailer, or you can also find it here. Either of those two sites will give you plenty of information and you will also be able to find any answers to questions you may have about the movie. I will also embed the video in this post for convenience. Enjoy!

Integrity: The Craigslist Congressman Should Have Kept His Shirt On

2011-02-10T09:00:00.007-05:00

If devotion to truth is the hallmark of morality, then there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking. Galt's Speech, Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

Far be it for me, a gay man, to discourage handsome men from taking their shirts off (and no--that's not a comment on this particular man--just a comment in general). However, since we seem to have evil creeping across the face of the globe in the form of Islamic-Fascism, Marxists and Communists populating the governmental bodies of the free nations of America and others, both groups joining together to bring down the classically liberal ideas of the Enlightenment upon which freedom was based, I think I'm going to go for it.

If the entire Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton fiasco did anything--it reminded Americans (or it should have) that what a man does in his personal life goes directly to the root of what kind of integrity he holds as an individual. Are we all perfect? No. Should perfection and analysis of the "why's" of our behavior make its way into our psyches to be better people? Absolutely. No society can survive for long when the idea is bred into it that all sorts of depraved and malignantly narcissistic behavior are "normal."

Now, as a gay man, I have had tons of discussions with some of the more religious-minded on the right that my "gayness" is an aberration. They are free to think that. I know they're wrong. I also know there are healthy gay men and women who have wonderful, loving relationships who are engaged in raising children and families of their own. On the flip side, there is most definitely the depraved side of gay life. "Gift-giving" parties where gay men go to deliberately infect themselves with life-shortening illnesses, drug and alcohol abuse; sometimes all combined to beat back lacking self-esteems which have no other way to cope with the sometimes difficult realities of one's sexuality.

Many argued Bill Clinton's "indiscretion" in the White House had no bearing on the way he did his job. I beg to differ. It very much had a bearing on the way he did his job--and personal integrity has a bearing on the way any individual is able to perform their job. As a boss, we wouldn't put up with employees who's lack of integrity effects the way they perform their job. Why should we expect any less from those in government. In this country, they are our employees--not our masters; as much as they might like to think so. Not only did President Clinton open himself up to be black-mailed (and let it really sink in that the American President is usually looked upon as the leader of the free world)--but, he also denigrated an office which is supposed to be held to a much higher standard. Thank God, no false messages were sent out to the young people of this nation that that kind of thing is acceptable--because, you know, the schools are doing such a bang-up job of making sure that moral relativism isn't bred into their little minds.

The character of John Galt, in Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand, says of integrity:

Integrity is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake your consciousness, just as honesty is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake existence—that man is an indivisible entity, an integrated unit of two attributes: of matter and consciousness, and that he may permit no breach between body and mind, between action and thought, between his life and his convictions—that, like a judge impervious to public opinion, he may not sacrifice his convictions to the wishes of others, be it the whole of mankind shouting pleas or threats against him—that courage and confidence are practical necessities, that courage is the practical form of being true to existence, of being true to truth, and confidence is the practical form of being true to one’s own consciousness.

Don't expect the Left, and by default the Democrat Party as it now stands controlled by the hard-core Left, to embrace integrity anytime soon. They have none. If they had principles, they wouldn't promote Marxism, collectivism and tyranny. If they had principles, they would have been able to foresee the damage their economic policies of giving homes to people who were collecting welfare checks was going to do. If they had principles, there wouldn't be a blatant disconnect between the rage they feel towards Christians, fearing theocracy-based policies from them, while at the same time promoting Islamic-Fasicsm--a fascism whose very purpose is to create a global caliphate. If they had principles, they might be able to work for true, classically liberal-based equality for gay men and women, while at the same time being brave enough to, not just criticize, but actually work towards helping those in the gay community who suffer from life-destroying mental pretzel twists which leave them almost paralyzed from being able to take control of their lives in a healthy manner rather than pulling out the "judgemental" card. The Left doesn't want people to judge--because if people judge, people will see them for what they are: tyrants, miscreants, amoral wolves in sheeps clothing.

But, when you live in a world of moral relativism--where nothing is to be brought up against critical, thought-provoking judgement of any kind, of course the Left wouldn't be able to make those connections--because they a) genuinely don't care or b) because it doesn't serve their agenda to make people dependent on them...so they have, as Tammy Bruce says so eloquently, backs to ride every two years towards their election returns.

So, when a member of the GOP goes this far and begins to slip into this garbage, whether it is this "gentleman," Rep. Christopher Lee, or perhaps another GOP'er like Mark Sanford, or any of a number of other names I could bring up--you're damn right I'm going to say something. At some point, we have to stop the poison from seeping into the entire culture--both political and domestic. If the Democrats want to destroy themselves, by all means, far be it for me to try and stop them. They have let the minority of miscreant Marxists in this country get hold of that party and as long as they have the ability to run as far and as fast as they can they will continue to try and put this country on the path to ruin even more than they already have. Let them implode. I could care less about them. They've done enough damage to this nation over the last 80 years. I have made myself quite clear, both on my Facebook page and my blogs (here and at The Objectivist Chronicle), that I will no longer play the "party-game" when it comes to defending fools from either party--because my integrity as a commentator is up for grabs. I have made a committement to my readers, as well as myself, to comment on political events as much from a position grounded in freedom-philosophy as I know how to do. And I won't compromise on that. Perhaps, Mr. Lee should have thought of his integrity as a statesman prior to acting like an ass and believing that it was time for him to don his Chippendale mask. Public service, especially public service in this country, should come with some common sense understandings of "do's and don'ts." Politicians have always been crooked, out for their own gain, and are petty and lying. But, look at the state of this country! Ask yourself, does it have to be this way? Why can't we expect more?

Integrity matters. Because in the end...

Integrity does not consist of loyalty to one’s subjective whims, but of loyalty to rational principles. The Virtue of Selfishness, Ayn Rand

...and if you're being loyal only to your whims, chances are, "rational principles" hold very little meaning.

Young America's Foundation Reagan Centennial

2011-02-04T12:02:00.001-05:00

Sunday, February 6th is Ronald Regan's 100th birthday. The Young America's Foundation is celebrating his birthday with a two day celebration. You can find the schedule for the two day celebration here. From the Young America's Foundation:
February 6, 2011, marks the 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s birth—a celebration Young America’s Foundation is calling Reagan 100.

During Reagan 100 Young America’s Foundation will recognize President Reagan, his values, his vision, and his lasting contributions to Freedom and its future. Through the Reagan Ranch, the Reagan Ranch Center, and expanded programming all across the country, we will bring President Reagan and his ideals back to life for the next generation.

On Friday, February 4th Governor Palin will be speaking at 8 P.M. PST / 11 P.M. EST. Former Vice President Dick Cheney will be speaking 7:30 P.M. PST / 10:30 EST. C-SPAN will also be covering the event. You can find coverage at their website.

Also included in the festivities is the inaugural viewing of the film Still Point in a Turning World: Ronald and his Ranch.

The film, written and directed by Stephen K. Bannon, is the definitive examination of Ronald Reagan’s beloved ranch and its personification of his philosophy and values. Ronald Reagan’s Rancho del Cielo, the “‘Ranch in the Sky,” was not just a respite from the chaotic world that his Presidency encountered, but also a living embodiment of the values he held dear. The Ranch was where hard work and self-reliance showed themselves in the principles he championed for all Americans: Freedom, Prosperity, Victory.

Explore the Ranch, as few have, in this moving film, and see why it “cast a spell” on the man who became one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

Ronald Reagan's ideas and lasting accomplishments launched decades of unprecedented prosperity and advanced freedom worldwide. Young America’s Foundation understands that, today, our country needs his ideas and his vision more than ever, and is committed to utilizing the Reagan Ranch to inspire future generations through this great man’s example.

Please enjoy the trailer:

Merry Christmas!

2010-12-24T14:34:00.000-05:00

I want to wish all my readers and their families a very merry and politically-incorrect Christmas!

Tea Party Review Makes Its Debut!

2010-12-17T20:06:00.002-05:00

That's right everyone! The Tea Party movement now has its own official magazine! It's called the Tea Party Review. It's debut was on Wednesday, December 15th. A subscription will make a great Christmas gift for a patriot on your Christmas list. From their website you will find the following inside this political treasure-trove about the movement that rocked the nation:

•Complete coverage of the 2012 presidential campaign.

•How are leading candidates reaching out to Tea Partiers?
•Who deserves Tea Party support?
•The ultimate rundown on political corruption in America. If you didn’t see it all in one place, you’d never believe it!
•Washington’s War on the American Family.
•Cartoons from the creators of “The Gentleman from Lickskillet”… and other satire aimed at Big Government and Obama’s “Ruling Class.”
•Bold commentary grounded in American values.
•¨“Now It Can Be Told”: Secrets of the 2010 Campaign
•¨Lame Ducks and Bureaucrats: How the Left Plans to Overturn the Election
•¨Obama’s War on the First Amendment… and the Rest of the Constitution
•¨Why the Tea Party Movement is the Mainstream in American Politics
•¨The RINOs Fight Back!
•¨The Left’s “Colorado Model” – and how we can beat it
•¨The Tea Party Agenda for Congress in 2011
•¨Will Republicans Keep Their “Pledge”?
•¨What They Don’t Want You to Know about “Progressives”
•¨Obama’s Alliance with Wall Street and Big Business
•¨The Top Ten Lies They Tell About Taxes
•¨Stimulus and Bailouts – Who Profits?
•¨Goldman Sachs, BP, Enron: Is “Green Energy” the Scam of the Century?
•¨Dirty Tricks and Vote Fraud in the 2010 Election
•¨Muslims versus the Ground Zero Mosque
•¨America’s Most Ridiculous Politicians
•¨Why the Elite Media Hate Us
•¨Glenn Beck vs. the Communist Party: A Tale of Two Rallies
•¨The Left’s War on Science and Reason
•¨How the Top Colleges Turn Kids into Stupid Leftists
•¨The Tea Partiers vs. the Race Baiters
•¨From ‘Starfish’ to ‘Overton’: Key Ideas Behind the Tea Party Movement

If you have a website or blog of your own you can become an affiliate helping to promote the magazine while at the same time helping to put some money in your pocket. You can sign up here:

http://www.teapartyreview.postaffiliatepro.com/affiliates/signup.php?a_aid=4d0bec171f950

Or you can sign up using the form located beneath the blog posts on this site. If you simply want to subscribe, either for yourself or someone else on your list, you can find banners located here at The Conservative Rainbow! Just click and subscribe!

Nothing could be more important than maintaining our unity to keep the freedom movement alive. As stated at the Tea Party Review:

As we enter the next phase – the most critical phase of the Tea Party movement – there’s one thing we need, more than anything else, to make our movement a permanent, powerful force in American politics.

We need a forum for Tea Partiers to come together, to trade ideas, to resolve disputes, to find out what other activists are doing and thinking…

… a place to develop plans for taking our country back from the elitist, arrogant, obnoxious, corrupt members of the Washington establishment and their friends in Hollywood, the news media, faculty lounges, and on Wall Street.

We need a magazine that tells people what we stand for… and what we won’t stand for.

Parasites Always Kill the Host

2010-12-15T21:18:00.001-05:00

This little beauty to the left is a photograph of a parasite called a "roundworm." The website, The Life Tree, describes this cutey as follows:

The intestinal roundworm Ascaris lumbricoides infection in humans follows the ingestion of Ascaris eggs that have contaminated foods or soil. In the small intestine the larvae are liberated and migrate through the intestinal wall, reaching the lungs, where they may produce a host sensitization that results in lung inflammation and fluid retention. About 10 days later, the larvae pass from the respiratory passages into the digestive tract and mature into egg-producing worms, which grow to some 15 to 40 cm (6 to 16 inches) in length, in the small intestine. Serious, even fatal, complications of ascariasis result from the infiltration of the larvae into sensitive tissues, such as the brain, and from the migration of the adult worms into various body structures where they produce abcesses and toxic manifestations.

That sounds pretty painful and uncomfortable, doesn't it? One could also use the same definition to describe Leftist Liberals and their pals in the public and private sector unions. Collectivists throughout history have always loved to saddle up to the unions of any particular country because, of course, Leftists are for "the little guy." I use to be of the mindset that unions were fine as long as they weren't feeding off the public treasury via favors from politicians looking to get reelected. That's part of the problem though, isn't it? There are no such barriers to prevent these people from bleeding the host (the taxpayers) and the public treasury dry. Due to this, I have completely changed my opinion regarding unions. Public unions entrenched in the bureaucracy are especially vicious; they are the hardest to get rid of or reign in because our illustrious leaders never get rid of the bureaucracies! To deal with public unions, my ideal solution would be to get rid of all non-essential bureaucracies (which for me, is everything but self-defense). As for private sector unions, they are a little easier to deal with. At the very least, I would legislate a separation between the private sector unions and the government: no more hand-outs, no more favors. National Review Online addresses the troubles unions cause in the article, The Enemy Within, by Iain Murray and F. Vincent Vernuccio. They describe how Margaret Thatcher dealt with unions:

When Margaret Thatcher went to battle with the public-sector unions, she pursued a two-pronged strategy: First she removed the unions’ privileges; then she undermined their power base by privatizing functions wherever possible, fragmenting the unions’ bargaining monopolies. If America is to shake off the burdens imposed by the public-sector-union behemoth, both of these remedies will need to be deployed, in that order.

This sounds like a good start. However, Ayn Rand was a big fan of closing the loopholes in America's Constitution which allowed collectivists to insert their malignancy into the system in the first place...and, as an Objectivist, I agree with her. Doing anything less is simply treating the symptoms rather than curing the disease. Good 'ole Maggie's idea sounds wonderful; however, it certainly doesn't appear to be anything that would have prevented Britain's collectivist enemies from reengaging their destructive policies once they regained power. To quote from The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand:

Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.

Frankly, if I had my way, we would call a Constitutional Convention and add an Amendment forever closing the ability of the collectivists to wreak their financial havoc on this supposedly free-nation (it's becoming less and less free as the decades roll on). That way, if they felt it necessary to satiate their bleeding, irrational, compassion for every sob story on the face of the planet they would then have to do it themselves and only through the voluntary cooperation of others rather than using the force of government to hold a gun to the heads of innocent citizen's demanding they give up their life and freedom; but, perhaps that's just me.

Altruism: The Poisoned Apple Foreign Policy Tactic

2010-11-24T18:46:00.004-05:00

An article entitled Has American Foreign Policy Ever Been This Screwed Up? over at American Thinker was recently posted by a friend of mine on Facebook. He was lamenting, as do I, the extremely altruistic ridiculousness that has become America's foreign policy "Poisoned Apple."

I posted the following on his thread:

Many of our foreign policy gaffaws are directly attributable to altruistic intentions--just like our domestic policy pushing us towards socialism / fascism. We don't fight wars to win; we fight to be nice or nation build. We send buckets of money in aid to foreign countries to ease our consciences over supposed guilt we should be feeling for our wealth--which according to so many on the Left--we have "stolen" from other nations. Stop for one minute and really think about that statement bandied about by the Left--then when you figure out the ludicrousness of it--get back to me. I've never known, from the perspective of critical thought, what the hell that statment is supposed to mean. We arm our enemies or we help dictators when it suits us and then turn on them when it doesn't. Dictators are either bad all the time (which they are) and should never receive help from the likes of the bright blessings of America or they're not bad and, to drop an Objectivist philosophical phrase, we need to "stop trying to have our cake and eat it too."

The author of the article, Michael Filozof states:

American foreign policy is in a state of total disarray. I don't think that our foreign policy has been in straits this dire since the early 1960s, when we rushed headlong from the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis straight into Vietnam. At least then our foreign policy was consistent in its anti-communism.

I almost laughed out loud when I read that! It's not that an element of it isn't true--but since Wilson and FDR--when the hell have we not been creeping towards socialism and collectivism in this country thanks to the Americn Left? The American Left has never been "consistent in its anti-communism!" The Right has been consistent, at least verbally, if not in their actions--but, let's not kid ourselves here--the Democrats have never been consistent in their anti-communism. The Left in America despised Reagan precisely because of his anti-Communist rhetoric. The Democats love dictators and collectivism! It's in their party's platform for crying out loud! If you believe people have a right to healthcare or any other commodity for that matter--you're a Communist! That's what defines them! Good grief people!

All in all, the author of the article is quite correct in his analysis: we have a foreign policy built upon a platform of inconsistency and immoral "do-gooder" altruism--i.e. giving away much more than we expect to get back.

It's all just so utterly ridiculous. You sort of expect this altruistic foreign policy crap from the Democrats--because it's what they do. But, when you have altruistic foreign policy dripping from a Republican administration, as it did under George W. Bush, then where does that leave us? We started all of the "don't shoot at the enemy unless you're shot at first" bullshit under George W. Bush. We're throwing money around the world like we're a drunk Daddy Warbucks on a spending spree at Tiffany's; we have already maxed out the nation's credit cards. As for the Leftist mantra "we've stolen all the wealth from the world"--did I miss something or have our Secretaries of State been running around holding guns to the heads of the guards of foreign treasuries demanding to be let into the vaults? If so, it's probably the first time Hillary has donned a ski mask and I missed it! Damn! Know what though? I bet she never looked more beautiful!

Exposed Like Never Before

2010-10-21T18:35:00.005-04:00

Bernard Goldberg, author of 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America and Crazies to the Left of Me, Wimps to the Right, has written an article over at AOL News entitled Juan Williams, NPR and the Death of Liberalism. Mr. Goldberg says:

What makes this so crazy -- and so sad -- is that liberals are the open-minded ones, the ones who cherish the free exchange of ideas, the smart ones. And if you don't believe me, just ask any liberal, who will be glad to tell you how smart and open-minded he or she is. But these are the kind of people who believe in "free speech" only as long as they agree with you.

But I feel worse for American liberals. Because what we have here is one more piece of evidence that too many of them have forgotten how to be liberal.

Only about 20 percent of Americans identify themselves as liberals. Liberalism was once a great American movement. It led the fight for civil rights, the most important issue, as far as I'm concerned, of the 20th century.

I have made this distinction in blog posts and other writings before; there is a difference between Classical Liberalism (our Founders' philosophy and the philosophy which came out of the Enlightenment) and Modern Liberalism / Progressives which is Leftist collectivism. Classical liberalism is defined as a free-society under a free-economy (i.e. laissez-fair capitalism--something we haven't had in this country for ages with the exception, perhaps, of the first 150 years or so).

There can be no such thing as a free-society if there is no free economy (laissez-faire capitalism) to go along with it. They are, by necessity, dependent on each other.

I have some hard news for the people of America; economic conservatism is the most important element and here's why: we cannot argue and debate about the luxury issues such as abortion, gay marriage, etc if we are living under economic collectivism. If, as a society, we decide we would like to live under the conditions modern day Cubans are living under--then abortion and gay marriage are going to be the least of our concerns.

We now live under a mixed-collectivist economy--and it is getting worse and worse as the decades roll on; freedom cannot survive like this. America and its ideas cannot survive like this. It is difficult for people in this country to imagine that we have been harboring internal enemies. In general, we do not like the idea of opposing anybody's right to say anything they wish; that is the whole purpose of the First Amendment. However, there are people who don't like the idea of freedom. There are people present in this country who think this way. That is fine--but, they don't want to have an open debate about their collectivist ideas because they know most Americans would reject them soundly if they are brought into the daylight. The bureaucracies, the Fed, the schools, Hollywood, the press--all have been subjugated to Leftist / Progressive / Collectivist creeping tyranny to poison the minds of the public and the youth for the purposes of making them more malleable to eventual economic, collectivist enslavement.

If there needs to be a "death" of anything--it needs to be the death of collectivism (Cuba, the former Soviet Union, the theocratic tyrannies of the Middle East) and Progressivism. Collectivism / Progressivism are the illnesses which have infected the entire Democrat Party and to a lesser degree various members of the elected Republican Party.

All of our public programs, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, all require the theft of one person to redistribute to someone else. Public programs are the same things as the larger collectivist tyrannical ideologies that fostered them. Whenever you discuss a government promoting public programs--you are discussing collectivism. Just because it is on a small scale makes it no less immoral. These programs are all insolvent and bankrupt because unaccountable politicians have been robbing the treasury and robbing the funds to pay out favors to their electorates to keep them in power. This reality about politicians is why public programs and collectivism, in the end, always destroy a society.

Voluntary charity is the only valid aid a free society can provide for help to those who truly need it.

Once any society starts compromising with collectivism in any form it opens the door for the slow creep of tyranny into that society; that is exactly what has been happening in our nation ever since the time of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Ayn Rand once wrote:

‎Since there is no such thing as the right of some men to vote away the rights of others, and no such thing as the right of the government to seize the property of some men for the unearned benefit of others--the advocates and supporters of the welfare state are morally guilty of robbing their opponents, and the fact that the robbery is legalized makes it morally worse, not better.

This is philosophically very important. Our Constitution and our form of government were devised to protect the individual over the collective. There is no such thing as "the good of society." The term "society" is, what is called in philosophy, a floating abstraction--it simply is a word that describes a collection of individuals who choose to live together under the same political contract; there is no such thing as a collective brain--it is why tyrannies fail and collapse; "society" as a concrete concept means nothing. Free, individual men cannot be bound together collectively as cattle. That is a harsh, philosophical reality that the collectivist Left refuses to recognize for whatever reason; whether it is ignorance or deliberate obfuscation for the accumulation of political power makes little difference.

If there are liberals or Democrats out there who want to truly help the downtrodden of society, if their desperation to help those in need truly comes from compassion rather than the need to acquire political power or somehow satiate a desperate desire to prove that collectivism really can work, then they need to ask corporations, businesses, and individual people to voluntarily donate some of their time and money to doing so. Anything else is a breeding ground for a continued creep towards tyranny.

Collectivism is evil because it robs the individual of his right to exist for his own sake. The man who votes deliberately to steal the bread out of his neighbors mouth through the unconstitutional process of Progressive taxation or to provide health care for one (the patient) at the expense of another (the doctor) is morally no better than the man who hires a hit man to do his killing for him.

When Left Is Not Right and Becomes Wrong

2010-10-16T18:15:00.001-04:00

Excellent article by Tammy Bruce over at FOX News entitled The 'W' Word Brings Fresh Hypocrisy to the California Governor's Race .

Ms. Bruce writes about the rank hypocrisy coming out of NOW (National Organization for Women) and how the organization no longer has anything to do with equal rights for women. The organization, instead, has become a tool to further a Leftist agenda. Much the same thing has occurred within the gay Left movement. The Left hijacks any legitimate movement for equal rights and uses it to advance a collectivist, tyrannical agenda; it then becomes the tyrannical agenda that is important rather than the good of equal rights maintaining importance. This is why one should always be clear that you are standing, philosophically, with the good and not crossing one's toe into the evil category.

Tammy writes:

NOW, of course, hasn't been taken seriously by anyone of consequence for at least a decade. The problem here is not NOW's impact on the election, but the message to a new feminist generation which, up until now, has had nowhere else to look for authentic feminist advocacy on behalf of women; an activism that's based in respect for women, our success, and making sure all of us are free to make the choices in life that best suit us an individuals. -- NOW claims to be that entity, but Bellasalma's comments should confirm for everyone that their agenda has nothing to do with improving the quality of women's lives and everything to do with promoting the so-called progressive agenda as operatives for the Democrat party.

If a person always remembers that collectivism (whether communistic, fascistic, or theocratic) results in the tyranny of herding human beings together as cattle--then you will always have a gauge to go by as to whether or not you are helping evil or fighting evil, honoring the individual or destroying the individual.

Excerpts from "Rules for Radical Conservatives" by David Kahane

2010-10-05T14:00:00.002-04:00

Just a reminder from Chris: This book is written from the point of view of a Leftist giving advice to the individualist, freedom-lover, conservative, libertarian, Objectivist--whichever right leaning moniker you want to grab on to. The author of this blog gives it an excellent review. The excerpts below are obviously not comprehensive--they are simply excerpts. This is a witty, fun, exciting read--and as it turns out--is excellent advice to boot! These are time-tested tactics which every Constitutional, freedom-loving American would be well-advised to adopt; we've been overdue for entirely too long. Below are some excerpts and brief entries from each section:

Rule No. 1: Know Your Enemy, His Intentions, His Weapons, and His Weaknesses, and Use Them Against Us. You too can play relentless, on-message hardball with every scandal, hypocrisy, lie, and fundamentally flawed policy your adversaries dish up.

Which brings us to Corollary No. 1: Know your enemy.

In other words, you used to know how to fight. You used to know how to recognize a mortal enemy, used to know how to deal with that enemy--by destroying him. Unconditional Surrender was Grant's motto, and Eisenhower's too. Since then...not so much. Now you're in another kind of war, not bloody but bloody serious, a war for your soul and the survival of your country, and you're looking for the exits.

This is, in case you haven't noticed, a fight to the death. For you, elections are a means to an end, usually some sort of corrective to what you see as our excesses. Action and reaction. For us, elections are the ends in themselves, and we won't be happy until we get to the last election. After which, there will be no more elections. The Apostle Saul laid all this out for you to see in Rules for Radicals, but of course your side never bothered to read the American equivalent of Mao's Little Red Book.

If you had, however, you'd understand the truth of Corollary No. 2: Have no illusions about our nature: Pride Incarnate, brimming at once with anger, resentment, and an overweening moral superiority based on nothing more than our own inflated self-esteem.

Which brings us to Corollary No. 3: Forget political correctness and speak your mind, no matter what the consequences.

You might file this one under: "Pair, Grow a." As we've seen, PC is an all-purpose tool for your subjugation, expressly intended to prevent clear speech and thus clear thought. Those two things alone can defeat us, which is why we cannot permit them in our Orwellian version of a "free country."

Rule No. 2: Become What You Behold. Adopt some of our scorched-earth tactics, best described in David Mamet's Untouchables: "They pull a knife, you pull a gun."

Because unless you lose your fastidiousness, and are prepared to get down in the trenches with us, your opponents, you're going to lose. Because if your enemy really is the Liberal/Progressive/Socialist/Communist/Marxist/ Fascist axis of "evil" that has so long bedeviled you, it's long past time that you put aside your nice-nancy-boy ways and come out swinging. Because whereas you see politics as a necessary evil, we see it as a combination of our life's work and a blood sport, the thing that makes our day jobs worthwhile--even if, as in most cases with us, our day jobs are also the things that provide us with the wherewithal to screw you. After all, who's paying our public sector salaries? Suckers!

And yet, time and again what we hear from your side is that you wouldn't want to adopt our tactics, that you wouldn't want to lower yourself to our standards and principles (your first mistake, since we don't have any, other than holding you to yours), that you would rather be right than win if it means fighting as dirty as we do. To which I say: that's why you're losers.

How to Talk Like a Liberal (and You Must)

1) You can't possibly mean that. This is our way of saying you're full of it, but it goes beyond simple disagreement. It means whatever it was you just said, it has put you beyond the pale of polite discussion; it also very likely means you're a racist, a bigot, a homophobe, and/or a practicing Roman Catholic. All of which are, among our crowd, grounds for instant expulsion from polite society.

2) Everyone knows that. Another all-purpose put-down, signifying that you're a complete idiot. It's a riff on the old Soviet "as is well known..." boilerplate, which pretty much signaled that whatever statement came next was a complete and utter lie, although we preferred to use the term "higher truth."

3) You're not really... This one's meant to indicate that the person you're speaking with is little better than a cave-dweller, a superstitious moron whose walnut-sized brain is probably stuffed with religious "dogma," and who is profoundly uninterested in all the Major Important Truths discovered in the late nineteenth and early twentiet centuries by Marx, Engels, Lenin, the Frankfurt School, Marcuse, and Oprah. Categories include practicing Catholic, Orthodox Jew, Republican, conservative, resident of flyover country, gun-owner, heterosexual, member of a two-parent family, and a driver of a 1984 Chrysler LeBaron.

Time to turn the tables. Come on, this one's easy--you can do it:

"You're not really still a Democrat, are you? Everyone knows that all right-thinking people were switching to Independent, and not moving in lockstep with the neo-Stalinists."

"You're not really still an atheist, are you? Everyone knows there's no upside."

"You're not really still going to stop at one kid, are you? Small families are so antisocial. Besides, everyone knows that we need lots and lots of kids to support the Social Security system."

Which brings us to Corollary No. 1: Forget being liked. You don't have time for a popularity contest, especially insofar as we're concerned. Take the battle to us at every opportunity. After all, we never stop--we attack you in the supermarket, in restaurants and dinner parties--so why should you? Remember, the Left feels emboldened because--based on abolutely no sense of traditional "morality" at all--we feel we are right. Whereas, you know you are right, but have always been too polite to mention it, preferring to indulge our whims rather than run the risk of being called intolerant.

Corollary No. 2: Treat us with the same contempt with which we treat you. Or, to put it in language you might actually understand: Treat us with the same respect we give you, which is none. Same difference.

After all, you don't see us being nice to you, do you? (Unless it's when we desperately need something, or when the "lone" foreign crazy manages to rattle us for a minute or two, or when we're looking down the barrel of an electoral gun.) You don't see us ever reaching across the aisle, extending the olive branch. Laurel wreaths are for winners, but olive branches can go pound sand.

[Side note by Chris: I've said it before--leave the Christianity, Buddhism, and Karma Doctrine to your church, meditation mats and your everday life. Rightees--when it comes to saving this country--you've got to slay a few Romans. So knock it off with the, "I wanna play nice" bullshit.]

Rule No. 3: The Culture Is the Message--So Seize It

This is crucial. Accept the fact that the "culture"--by which, of course, I mean "us"--is never going to reflect your version of reality until you change it from within. Our infiltration and takeover of the "narrative" has been going on since the 1960s and reversing it is no small task. If you're looking for acceptance or, worse, love from the mainstream media, your old college professor, or Hollywood, forget about it. This is a war you've long ago lost--but which you can still win if you choose to fight it. But the first step in fighting lies is picking up an (eek!) weapon and choosing to use it, so until you do that, buddy, you are standing there as bare-assed as Mel Gibson and his band of Scottish merry men in Braveheart. And look how far they got.

Corollary No. 1: Get back in the media game. And how do you do that? Simple: Start by taking your media back.

Let's face it: at this point the U.S. is pretty much a banana republic, riven by two factions that are not quite numerical equilibrium. Which is a fancy way of saying that there are more of you than there are of us, always have been, but by using our pet media as a kind of kinescope, the illusion of an illusion, we have been able to fool you throughout the last century into believing that we have both right and might on our side. On the one side are you, the revanchists, clinging desperately to your faith and your guns and your charming belief in your cherished "Constitution," while on the other is us: revolutionary, amoral, and wanting nothing more than the complete destruction and remaking of your country--a mote in our eye since its inception!--in the egalitarian-collectivist mode. Which, after all, only fulfills the prescriptions inherent in your Declaration and constitutional Preamble. From the Shining City on a Hill to Satan's throne of Royal State of which Milton sang--that's the descent we have outlined for you.

Corollary No. 2: Stop thinking that "Hollywood" is a dirty word.

Here's what you need to know: Hollywood runs on fear and greed and as soon as the money lies on the opposite side of the Left-Right equation, fear and greed will switch teams. For a long time its unassailable position as the driver of the popular culture left it immune to the vagaries of the marketplace: as long as big "tent pole" movies made money, it could afford to indulge its leftist political leanings with films designed not to succeed at the box office but to succeed at Beverly Hills dinner parties. Hence the spate of Iraq War duds like Rendition and Redaction and Return to Bethlehem (okay, I made that last one up, sort of), all made with malice aforethought and with the full knowledge that they wouldn't recoup a penny (not that any Hollywood film ever recoups--just ask any writer with monkey points!).

Corollary No. 3: Reclaim academe.

This is a longer-range proposition; we have had, after all, nearly half a century to completely hollow out the major colleges and universities, especially your so-called "Ive League" institutions, largely in the name of our most sacred of sacred cows, the Great God Diversity. The Ivy League sent a disproportionate number of its sons (no daughters allowed in those benighted old days) off to fight in the Civil War, World War I, and the Big One. But after the collapse of the Germany of the National Socialist German Workers Party--and what part of that name sounds like the Reagan Revolution to you?--and Imperial Japan, our elite colleges, especially in New England and on the West Coast, became infested with the scions of Moral Relativism, so that a few short decades after the socialist fascists were suddenly overrepresented among the socialist-communists of Harvard, Yale, and Brown students. Viva la Revolucion!

Rule No. 4: Get on Offense and Stay on Offense--and Take No Prisoners. Attack our premises, expose their true nature and consequences, and pin them on us, hard.

So there you are, lying flat on your back on the canvas and wondering whether the referee got the number of that truck. For decades, we've pummled you and pounded you, if not quite into submission then pretty close to it. We've robbed you of your tongue, of your fighting spirit; we've hamstrung you with lawyers and political correctness. We've made you doubt the worth of everything you once held dear--now there was a practical application of "Critical Theory" if there ever was one!--including your culture, your history, and, well, you. We've practically criminalized everything about you, including your thoughts, and it's just a matter of time before we get those too. Why, we've got top government-funded scientists in their labs woking on a brain wave reader right now!

And I don't mean pattycake. Reagan was able to deflect us with wit and good humor and pretty much got his way. True, he didn't really deliver on any of his campaign promises except cutting taxes and destroying the dear old Union of Soviet Socialist Republics--the Panama Canal still belongs to Panama, and the departments of Energy and Educations are happily still with us, continuing their irresistible, malevolent bureaucratic growth and giving birth to hordes of new Democratic voters every day--we sure hated his guts while he was around, although we wept copious crocodile tears after his demise.

Corollary No. 1: No more Mr. Nice Guy. It is better to be feared than liked.

McCains's defeat should have made this clear. The "maverick" who relied on the civility of the Senate and never came to an aisle he didn't want to cross was woefully unprepared for the attacks launched on him by his erstwhile "friends" in the media; the man who had been for years the press corp's favorite Republican was suddenly suspect. "I don't know," a lot of my friends here in Los Angeles said to me over sushi at Fat Faish, "I used to like McCain, but something's happened to him." That something, of course, was running against our guy--not that he put up much of a fight or anything. In fact, the whole election was like watching one of those boxing movies from the late 1940's, like The Set-Up, except that this time the fighter does what the gangsters tell him to do, and that's take a dive. No heroic resistance here: having alienated a large swatch of the conservative electorate, McCain was left alone on the field, and only the Warrior Princess at his side made his ultimate electoral showing as respectable as it was. Naturally, around our campfires, we don't quite tell it that way, since Sarah Palin is the one thing we Hollywood types fear almost as much as Saint Michael with a blazing sword showing up on our doorsteps just as we're about to do a line of coke and slip in the hot tub with a couple of Polish starlets.

Which brings us to Corollary No. 2: Get rid of the RINOS.

As far as you losers are concerned, every RINO is, in effect, on our side, because he or she has already surrendered the high ground of moral principle for the squishy soft middle ground of "compromise." But as that lunatic Rush Limbaugh keeps shouting at you at tiresome length, there can be no accomodation on principle: the minute you agree to meet in the middle, then you've already abandoned your redoubt and are now engaging us right where we want you--on the killing fields of compromise. Those fields are already littered with the whitening bones and bleached skulls of your earlier Hectors, whose corpses we tied to our chariots and drove round and round the walls of your shining city on a hill.

[Side note by Chris: Ayn Rand would have loved that last paragraph...LOL!]

Rule No. 5: Let the Dismantling Begin

Indeed, make destruction your campaign slogan: Roll it back! Get those clean-cut young military officers out there on the hustings with a vow not simply to restore the status quo ante, but to revel in the destruction. Describe lovingly how each brick is going to be taken down, each monstrous agency of the federal government--a government that, by now, pretty much everybody hates, even us--is going to be cut down to size or eliminated altogether. How lazy, shiftless bureaucrats who make twice what you do are going to be de-unionized, forced to actually work in the dismantling of their own agencies, of their own jobs, and then summarily and publicly fired. How budgets will be first slashed and then eliminated entirely, how excess government property will be closed down and auctioned off, how taxes will be drastically reduced on the productive class and increased on the freeloading class--you know, the 47 percent of all taxpayers who today pay not one dime in federal income taxes. You want to be part of this country, says to the bunch of schmuck loser real estate hustlers in the film version of Mamet's materpiece, Glengarry Glen Ross: "It's fuck or walk."

Here's the best part, the way you're going to sell this. You're not just tearing stuff down and blowing shit up for the fun of it, the way we do, and the way history's first rebel, Satan, tried to do in heaven. Oh, no. You're tearing down the walls of the socialist prison we have been building around you. You're not destroyers, you're liberators! Just like we were back in 1968!

Corollary No. 1: Challenge everyone of our premises and our "accomplishments." Expose their true nature and consequences for real people, and pin them on us, hard. Freeze them, personalize them, polarize them, as we love to repeat ad nauseam.

It's easier than it might look. Since our only real defense against any of your philosophical challenges is to call you a Nazi and walk away in a huff, get in our face at every conceivable oppportunity. Do not let us make one single statement unchallenged; do not let us frame and dictate the terms of any debate. Wouldn't it be one of the great cheer moments in modern American history if once--just once!--you saw a military officer or a captain of industry testify before Congress, subjected to the preening, self-indulgent stupidity of some leftist man-of-the-people millionaire, when all of a sudden the man or woman stops, turns on his tormentors, and says something like this:

You know, I have been sitting here for more than an hour, being lectured by a bunch of clowns who can't tie their own shoes without a pollster, a bunch of boobs I wouldn't hire in my mailroom, if I still had a mailroom, a bunch of lying, malevolent skunks who have used their offices as "public servants" to further enrich themselves and their friends, all at the expense of the Little Guy they profess to care about. By rights, you all ought to be hanging from the lampposts along Constitution Avenue as penalty for the sins you've committed against our great country. You deserve to wind up like Mussolini and Clara, upside down in the village square, where the kids can throw rocks at you. You deserve to be frog-marched out of here, placed under arrest, your finances opened to public inspection, your private papers exposed for all the world to read. In a show trial, broadcast live on national television and streamed live to every computer, iPhone, Blackberry, PDA, iPad, and other devices not yet invented, you should be made to confess your malfeasance, offer restitution, beg forgiveness, and then be shot for the crimes you have committed against our country, its people, and its Constitution--a Constitution you swore to uphold and defend, but which apparently meant to you loot and pillage. That's what ought to happen to you, Senator, and in a just nation, under God, that's exactly what's going to happen.

[Sounds of doors being forced open, a great crowd rushing the hearing room. Senators and their aides scream as an enraged populace, unmolested by any police, seizes the solons and drags them from the chambers...]

Corollary No. 2: Think the unthinkable. Go ahead, it's fun!

Get rid of Social Security? Why not? It's always been a giant pyramid racket, borrowing from the unborn Paul to pay the sixty-five-year-old Peter today--and to keep paying him for the next twenty or thirty years. The problem is, there is no unborn Paul, since some young woman proudly taking control of her body just aborted him. And without the Pauls of the future, we have to print extra money to cover the unfounded liabilities inherent in a pyramid scheme such as this one, which was sold to the public (duplicitously, as usual) as both a "safety net" and a retirement plan, as both a "tax" and "not a tax" as it withstood the legal challenge that rightly ought to have strangled it in its cradle. For decades, Social Security was considered the "third rail" of American politics, touch it and you die, but pretty soon we're all going to be like Mr. Blue in the original Taking of Pelham One Two Three and deciding it's easier to touch that rail and get it over with rather than face the consequences of having given birth to the Thing That Devoured Cleveland--and every other American city.

Which bring us, in extremis, to Corollary No. 3: Having thought it, act on it.

The country is ripe for a huge rollback. Abolish many or most of the regulatory agencies, sunset the laws that have outlived their usefulness or accomplished their objective, put a moratorium on new legislation until the old debris is cleared away. Actually act on campaign promises to eliminate wasteful federal agencies, such as the departments of Energy and Education as well as the cumbersome and Orwellian Homeland Security Department. The goal: to try and restore the proper balance between productive citizen and "civil servant," with the former the master of the latter once more.

Rule No. 6: At All Times, Think Constitutionally

The key, of course, is to get the lawyers on the case. As we've seen, one of our objectives was to turn the U.S. into a natnion of the lawyers, by the lawyers, and for the lawyers, and in that you'll have to admit we have succeeded spectacularly. A kind of mystic aura has grown up around the law, as with wine or classical music, except that if you get it wrong you can go to jail. In fact, though, the law is nothing more than shared morality and social goals given written expression. Everything else, as they say, is commentary.

Corollary No. 1: Get back to first principles: The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution

They're all that's standing between you and either anarchy or dictatorship, and the sooner you figure that out, the quicker you'll bring the eternal battle between your guy and our Big Fella back into some kind of weird, Buddhistic, Asian-fusion harmonic equilibrium.

Rule No. 7: Adapt the Time-Honored Conservative Message for a New Kind of America and a New Kind of American

Corollary No. 1: Put your money where your principles are and demonstrate that you welcome new-look America--as long as it stays America. Because either all men are created equal, or they aren't.

Still, that's no reason for you to surrender to our Brezhnev Doctrine. What we liberals have done to the black community since the 1960s should be a national scandal: though our vast panoply of soul-crushing (now there's a concept!) social programs, enforced by unelected bureaucracies, and a public school system that makes the Western Front in World War I look like just another day in the trenches, we have destroyed black families (and we're working on white families now), encouraged what used to be called antisocial behaviour, celebrated the worst regarding matters of mores, and generally turned a culture updside down, so that it is now ruled by "ganstas." We swooped in, like drug dealers, hooking the people on hopelessness, and at the same time promising to cure the very diseases we had spread around. The beauty of our plan, something we learned from the crooked politicians of the Chicago Machine and Tammany Hall, was that the cure for misery was always more misery, to keep the people in a state of permanent desperation and illusion, a never-ending cycle, always spiraling downward. Sheer genius, really.

Corollary No. 2: Mean it.

Either you're all in this together or you're not; either this unprecedented experiment works or it doesn't; either America succeeds as humanity's last, best hope, or she's ours--another failed state, having fallen victim to "immutable" truths about humanity: that we really can't just all get along on our own and we need Big Brother to act as the enforcer. The country may be changing demographically but acceptance of the bedrock principles of the United States and its Founders must be universal and nonnegotiable. Conservatives need to return to the previous model, in place when great waves of immigration swept the country around the turn of the last century. Nobody gave a sucker an even break back then, and the newcomers were left pretty much to fend for themselves, to take care of their own and, most important, to get with the program. If America really is a state of mind, a collective dedication to the idea of individual rights, then what does it matter the country of origin?

Corollary No. 3: Make new friends.

There is no reason you racist reactionaries can't continue to make inroads among the Hispanics and the East Asians, including the Chinese, Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Filipinos, all of whom have strong streaks of self-reliance and intact families; and the subcontinental Indians, who have already begun to dominate entry-level capitalistic fields and whose numbers will only swelll in the future, as they arrive here with a full command of English and well grounded in the traditions of British democracy. After all, who are the "Reagan Democrats" but the children of the white ethnics who took the Tammany shilling in the bad old days because it was shortest, swiftest, and most effective way up and out? You don't see many Irish on the Lower Ease Side of Manhattan anymore, nor Germans aound Tompkins Square or in Yorkville. Things change, but plus ca change...they got replaced by more or less the same kinds of people.

Corollary No. 4: Expose the Left for who we really are.

In the end, despite the relentless hammering from the anti-civilizational pseudo-intellectuals of the Frankfurt School and its American fellow travelers--as frustrating as we might find it--this country is strong enough to resist the importation of smug, and yet somehow victimized, Centra European socialism as a response to its perceived (or imagined) problems. And once the large population understands that our unctuous manner of speech, our assumed aura of "goodness," and our faux "concern" for anybody other than ourselves is just the same tired old act that fired the beast Marx as he howled in London; brought Mussolini and Hitler to power and sent Lenin to the Finland Station; seized China and North Korea and Cuba and half of Africa and condemened them to a life of squalor and misery and deceit and death--then I, for one, don't want to be on the business end of their wrath when it comes. Once it is frozen, personalized, and polarized, a la Alinsky, the black heart of Marxism will be as helpless as the Wizard of Oz--a deadly illusion that you will be well rid of, and will make me very happy I picked up that beachfront condo in Havana for a song. (I think it was a rousing, if slightly drunken chorus of "The East is Red.")

And that, my stupid friends, is a day you should hasten. But, in order to do that, you're going to have to pay strict attentnion to our next rule:

Rule No. 8: Get Better Officers

Because, frankly, you've forgotten how to fight.

You can't afford colorless Speakers of the House, or go-along, get-along collaborationists like most of your senators. You need officers who are going to inspire the troops, not dispirit them, commanders who've earned the love of their followers precisely by not crossing the aisle, instead preferring to stand on principle. These brave men and women are going to have to step out of the ranks and step up, and when they are attacked by our side--as they surely will be--you must defend them. Nobody wants to lead troops into battle and, halfway across the killing fields, find out he or she is all alone.

Corollary No. 1: Turn in the direction of the skid.

Do exactly the opposite of what your first instincts are.

After so many dreadful years n the post-FDR electoral wildernes, congressional Republicans more resemble battered wives than all-American men. They want to cover their heads and assume the fetal position in the hopes we'll stop pounding on them. But as the reaction to Sarah Palin--on both sides--demonstrated, the base is ready to follow its leaders into battle, provided the leaders show that they really want to fight. McCain's finest moment was his acceptance speech, in which he exhorted the audience to fight with him. Unfortunately, his lust for aisle crossing and the plaudits of his once-and-future buddies in the media got the better of him, so he kept his promise to lose--did he ever!--rather than challenge our definition of "dirty." By which we always mean asking questions about inconvenient truths that make our side uncomfortable and queasy. Stick to the issues! we shout, as our pet media poodles happily arf arf in the background. McCain was our perfect stealth candidate, a military man who didn't really want to fight.

If there's one lesson you need to learn from the debacle of 2008, it's this: never, ever, ever again nominate a man who tells you he'd rather lose honorably than punch our lights out.

Corollary No. 2: Elections are not about programs, but principles.

Hey, Dumbo--"programs" are our thing...

Principles are what counts. So stop trying to outdo us by rushing to the microphones with a silly plan to solve every social ill this side of halitosis whenever our pet frogs in the media croak about a new "crisis" in the daily news feed. In fact, forget about programs completely. Just say no! And if we call you out and demand to know--which we will, you can bet on that, it's part of the playbook--the details of your "plan," laugh and tell them to shove it and start talking about principles. To do otherwise is to accept our premises, which means you have already lost. Instead, stick to the big picture: liberty, self-reliance, faith, freedom. Those concepts are to us like a crucifix to a vampire, but heed not our squeals. Instead, keep brandishing your integrity and have the satisfaction of watching us collapse, writhing, on the floor into a puddle of putrescent malefaction, just like Christopher Lee in all those great Hammer movies.

*Infiltrate our organizations and, if they're criminal, expose them in the free media and turn them in. We're the side who hates "rats," remember, which is why we still hate Elia Kazan for "naming names" during the "commie witch hunts" of the 1950's, and directing that revanchist move on the Waterfront. Throughout the twentieth century, we've done our best to implant the notion in the public's mind that there's something dishonorable about taking down criminal organizations from the inside. We expect there to be honor among thieves!

*Call us out every chance you get. Personalize the target, freeze it, polarize it--go ahead, give it a try. Two can play that game! Because what happens when you do this? Well, your instinct is immediately to apologize, grovel, and promise never to let it happen again. Our reaction is to snarl, snap, bark, and, when necessary, bite. We become the unloveliest of unlovely people (I'm sure you can think of many current examples). Punctuate that unctuous, self-righteous "argument from authority," the everybody-knows-this subsumation we always trot out before the discussion is even held. Challenge the sense of entitlement, which often cloaks itself in victimhood, mostly imagined, since Harvard-educated lawyers really have a hard time playing the victim card. In other words, turn Alinsky's fourth and fifth tactical rules--Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules and Ridicule is man's most important weapon--against us; make us live up to our absurd preachments and ridicule us when we don't. We hate it when that happens.

*Take to heart the first rule of Alinskyian tactics, that real power is what the enemy thinks you have, not what you really have. All our snarling betrays the deep inner insecurity we feel when we face you, because we know that if you wanted to, you could crush us under your heel. In our tiny, never-been-west-of-the-Hudson or east-of-Palm Springs souls, we envisage a great dark ugly world or armed militias, God-fearing church folks, country music, and women who can shoot and look great in little black dresses at the same time. As Alinsky's ninth tactical rule has it, The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

*Always keep the pressure on. No time to go home now to spend more time with the wife and kids. Your side may not have picked this fight, but you're in it so you'd better be in it to win it.

Rule No. 9: Never Stop Fighting Until the Fight Is Over

Corollary No. 1: You have an honorable history--use it.

Not only did you clean out the rats' nests of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, you also won the Cold War against an enemy who preached liberty, equality, bread, and peace even as it enslaved and starved and murdered millions. And you did it despite a forty-year record of often open treachery and sedition by the Left, from the Soviet spy rings of the 1940s through Jimmy Carter's private letters to various heads of state, asking them not to cooperate with George H.W. Bush's Gulf War coalition.

Show us for the haters we really are, people who hate the United States even as we bristle when you "challenge our patriotism," people who hate Western Civilization ("Hey hey/ho ho/Western civ/ has got to go"), people who hate organized religion (the sainted Alinsky told us to attack Christianity, and have we ever) for its proscriptions and it contributions to the rise of the West. Strip away our masks and reveal the skulls beneath our skins--not the skulls of ordinary human beings, but the titanium skull of the Terminator. As entertaining as it can be, rage is all we have left, instead of a coherent philosophy.

Corollary No. 2: Go Radical Conservative

The Left loves to fight, at least symbolically; it's what we live for. Conservatives tend to fight only when roused by intolerable provocation. But the Right's attitude should be more like the old joke about the Irishman who stumbels into a back-alley brawl and asks, "Is this a private fight or can I join in?" Hit the Left, hit us for profit, hit us just for the sheer hell of it. But hit us, and keep hitting us until we scoot back to Lanskyland, or Beverl Hills, or Minnesota, or the Upper West Side, wherever we feel most comfortable, to lick our wounds and plot our comeback. Modern conservatives roll over and play dead. Radical Conservatives take the fight to the enemy. Because, at this point, you have no other choice.

You've been standing by helplessly, watching the growth of the Leviathan state as it gradually but inexorably slices away freedom after freedom like some slow-moving threshing machine, and you're the poor sod who's bound hand and foot and lying directly in its path. As you lie there, you have a chance to reflect that, like the hero of any good Greek tragedy, you've brought this doom upon yourself. You think back to every time you've nodded, acquiesced, and even voted for our liberal agenda, which always came to you couched in the language of "progress" and "rights." Of "why nots" and "It can't hurts." You cheered when our orators vowed to continue the fight; hell, you even got a little misty when loser Teddy Kennedy took his leave of the 1980 Democratic convention with his famous peroration: "For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."

What cause? What hope? What dream? That's the part you never thought to ask. Because you never realized that, far from being real progressives, we're Odoacer at the Sack of Rome in A.D. 476 (oops! I mean "Common Era")--the pillage is the point, not the progress. By the time we have to deal with the consequences of our destruction, we'll be dead. But, to look on the bright side, so will you.

When we look at the founding documents, particularly the Constitution, it is our intention, through the assiduous application of "critical theory," to exactly reverse their meaning, to force them to justify our statist goals and to get you to agree to the revised meaning as a truth to be held self-evident. When this happens, and we are working as hard and as fast as we possibly can to at last unveil our new earthly paradise of complete state control in the one country explicitly and deliberately founded on its exact opposite, our work will at last be done. Our long march through the institutions will be over. Our command and control of the universities, the media, the civil service, and the very institutions of government enumerated in the Constitution's first three articles will be absolute...

Never again will you shudder at the words "We're from the government and we're here to help." All those awful alarmist books they forced you to read in school (well, private school anyway), the ones about good and evil and the dangers lurking under the so-called "totalitarian" bed--Paradise Lost, 1984, Animal Farm, Darkness at Noon, The Gulag Archipelago-what did those writers know? It's a brave new world, comrade. That's the proposition we are currently putting to the test, and unless you stop us, and soon, we're going to find out together just that means. As always, you'll be the last to know, waking up only when you find yourself in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, instead of the United States of America.

Commit this to memory: there is nothing we will not do to tear you down. There is no lie we will not tell, no falsehood we willl not spread, no fact that we will not twist or manufacture. There is no accusation too base for us to deliver, no area of your life that we will not examine, no personal or family secret that we will not expose if we can. At long last, sir, the truth is out: we have no decency and we are proud of it. In our agony and misery and our self-hatred we are determined to take you down with us.

Commit this to memory: never stop punching. No victory is permanent, no defeat is final. So if you really believe that stuff about eternal vigilance being the price of liberty, then you have to start acting like you believe it. There may be legislative compromises along the way, but there can never be compromise on principles. Established societies are rarely conquered from the outside; indeed, they are established societies precisely because of their adherence to shared principles and cultrual norms. You don't create a social structure by beginning with who you're not. You start with who you are and build from there, brick by brick, block by block, city by city. You don't create lasting institutions by starting to question their foundations from the minute you've invented them. You can't have "critical theory" unless there's already something there to tear down. To wield the wrecker's ball first requires the work of a master builder.

And whose side would you rather be on? The builder or the destroyer?

Or, to put it another way, the builder, demonized as a destroyer? Or the destroyer, hailed as a builder? We are nothing if not always through the looking glass.

Commit this to memory: always be on the attack. Oh, we'll come at you with every smear in the book, you can rest assured of that, but instead of getting all weepy and apologizing for whichever sin we've just accused you of, try this: laugh at us: If there is one thing that the Devil cannot abide...but let the ignoble C.S. Lewis--an atheist who became a Christian, the rotter--cite appropriate authorities:

"The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to tests of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear the scorn."--Martin Luther

"The devil...the prowde spirite...cannot endure to be mocked."--Thomas More

The proud Devil will not be mocked for he cannot bear scorn, and neither can we. Destroy the myth of our moral superiority and watch us crumble. And then club us and keep clubbing us. Oh, we'll have one final trick up our sleeve, and that will be to make you feel bad about using our despicable, reprehensible tactics against us. Ignore us, and keep fighting.

Which brings us to this last and most important rule:

Rule No. 10

The fight is never over.

Take Them to the Woodshed!

2010-09-14T23:29:00.000-04:00

I want it known that I believe these men deliberately worked and are working...

...to destroy this man's legacy!

The National Republican Senatorial Committee has announced that it will not support Christine O' Donnell's candidacy financially; a candidate supported and put forth by the Tea Party. They said, "The money could be better spent elsewhere." If that isn't an open admission of a group of self-important, tyrannical, oligarchical politicians filled with an over-entitled sense of their own self-importance...then I don't know what is. The five men above, in one way or another, have all worked tirelessly to destroy Ronald Reagan's legacy. Regardless of how one feels regarding George W. Bush keeping our nation safe after 9/11--the bottom line is that he, along with the other Republicans in Congress during his administration, helped to fiscally destroy this nation and helped pave the way for the Marxist we now have in the White House. America can fight a war and be fiscally responsible working to reduce the size of the Federal Government at the same time--getting it out of the people's way so we can live our lives as freely as possible. The six men above are clearly not up to the task of doing the will of the American people.

I call on Tea Party members all across the nation to deprive the NRSC of any monetary donations. Support candidates directly! Do not filter the money through the political machine! These people must be defeated and smacked down!

George, Daddy, Jeb, Rove, Steele, McCain--the whole damn gang needs to be taken out to the woodshed! WE...HAVE...HAD...ENOUGH!!! We will NOT give this country over to you any longer to join with the Commiecrats in the fiscal destruction of this nation!!! I do not live and die by the mantra to "never criticize another Republican."

Bullshit! Here we make our stand!

Update to My Readers

2010-09-14T16:54:00.001-04:00

Hello all,

I just wanted to send out an apology; I have not been posting as frequently. I've re-entered the academic world and I've been a tad distracted with schoolwork. Hence, some of my blog entries have been suffering. If you like you can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter. I make shorter posts regarding current events in both those arenas as well. The end of my first term is coming up fairly soon and I will have about a week off where I hope to get some blogging done! Until then I just wanted to let you know where I've been!

Best wishes!

Christopher

Attn: Conservative Bloggers

2010-09-06T12:25:00.002-04:00

The owner of this site, Stephen Hunter, contacted me via email. Here is his email to me:

Hi,

My brother and I just launched our own Conservative & Tea Party related news website, http://www.teadump.com/. It's basically a free (advertisement-free) repository of all the latest and most popular Conservative and Tea Party news. I was wondering if you would be willing to exchange links, or a banner, or to write up an article about our site, or just a few simple words or something? Also, be sure to submit your articles and/or blog posts on our site.

Thanks!

- Stephen

I told Mr. Hunter I would be happy to submit my blog posts to his site. I figured, at the very least, it's a new way to get exposure. If you have a conervative blog or contribute to a conservative blog (ask your administrator first) perhaps you want to look into signing up and contributing your posts here!

Removing the Targets From Their Behinds

2010-08-25T23:42:00.000-04:00

Well, it looks as though there are at least 6 Democrats standing up to the Marxist agenda put forth by President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. However, my sense is they are really just trying to save their own asses by removing the targets from their butts. Voter revenge bombs require a big, old "bend over and grab the ankles!" Some of them don't even have the cojones to put the fact they are Democrats in their ads! Don't you just love principled politicians? From ABC News:

Tammy Bruce had this to say on her radio show:

Here's the problem, of course, when you run as a Democrat and you get elected, you give people like Nancy Pelosi...power! And you give Democrats with whom obviously you're not voting with--you give them power! What are you people doing? If you're standing against every single thing that your pathetic little sewer is trying to move through this country--switch! Switch parties! Fabulous! They're just squirming around!

To their credit--some, if not all, of the people above did vote against Obama's agenda because they are "Blue Dog Democrats". But, as Tammy pointed out--the problem with that is--if you are not a Left-Wing, Progressive, Communist moon-bat and really don't hold any grudges against capitalism--then don't be a Democrat!!! The blue-dog thing...is dead. It's crap. Don't get me started on unions! We can see what they've done to this nation and to the communities in which they reside! They've completely bankrupted those communities with out of control pensions and undeserved payrolls! The time for unions was in the past. They were fine when he had to deal with things like child labor and other such societal issues. However, it is time for this country to grow up and dump the unions from every company, business, or government agency that has them. It's ridiculous. If you can't do the job that's required based on your merit--then you don't deserve the damn job! Or the raise! The only thing you get with unions is Left-Wing Socialist / Commie / Fascist nut-job collusion with the government. Either get rid of them completely or America needs to pass legislation that prevents these people from receiving favors from the government; one of those two things needs to happen. Enough...is enough with the unions.

Greg Gutfled says, "I'm Opening a Gay Bar Next to the Mosque! Really!"

2010-08-10T20:36:00.005-04:00

Hat Tip to Tammy Bruce Radio for making me aware of this!

Greg Gutfeld from the FOX News show Red Eye has announced, in all seriousness and in the spirit of outreach, that he will be opening a new gay bar near the new mosque at Ground Zero! He already has some investors lined up. Over at The Daily Gut, Greg says:

I'm announcing tonight, that I am planning to build and open the first gay bar that caters not only to the west, but also Islamic gay men. To best express my sincere desire for dialogue, the bar will be situated next to the mosque Park51, in an available commercial space.

This is not a joke. I've already spoken to a number of investors, who have pledged their support in this bipartisan bid for understanding and tolerance.

As you know, the Muslim faith doesn't look kindly upon homosexuality, which is why I'm building this bar. It is an effort to break down barriers and reduce deadly homophobia in the Islamic world.

The goal, however, is not simply to open a typical gay bar, but one friendly to men of Islamic faith. An entire floor, for example, will feature non-alcoholic drinks, since booze is forbidden by the faith. The bar will be open all day and night, to accommodate men who would rather keep their sexuality under wraps - but still want to dance.

Bottom line: I hope that the mosque owners will be as open to the bar, as I am to the new mosque. After all, the belief driving them to open up their center near Ground Zero, is no different than mine.

My place, however, will have better music.

Over at Twitter under gutfeldgaybarnnames there are suggestions for what to name the new bar (naughty alert on some of these). Some of the more colorful suggestions are:

The Corn Holed Caliph
Paki IT IN
Pink Crusades
Premature Detonation
Talibone
Goat's Night Off
Shiite Hole
Allah Gaybar
Allah About the Boys
Weapons of Ass Destruction
The Pink Turban

Greg! In the name of tolerance--the homosexuals are behind you! Oh wait...okay...maybe not behind you...

Cry Baby! Cry Baby!

2010-07-15T03:34:00.003-04:00

Liberty Scout has outlined the Democrats' escalated war with their own administration:

"In recent weeks, a widespread belief has taken hold among Democratic House members that they have dutifully gone along with the White House on politically risky issues — including the stimulus plan, the health-care overhaul and climate change — without seeing much, if anything, in return. Many of them are angry that Obama has actively campaigned for Democratic Senate candidates but has done fewer events for House members."

Are you feeling a little abandoned by your leaders: Pelosi, Reid, and Obama? Are these the same three who convinced you that if you just voted for more stimulus, climate change legislation, and socialized medicine that the American people would just fall in love with you and you would maintain your jobs in the upcoming mid-term election?

Wow...were you suckers played...right along with the American people.

Do you want to know the ironic thing about all of this? If you had all done the right thing--i.e. restored capitalism, voted against socialized medicine, against more stimulus plans, against climate legislation and enforced America's borders thereby maintaining her sovereignty--you would have all been the heroes of the American people. Instead, you allowed three Marxist, socialistic, fascistic morons to turn your heads with pretty words of sweet nothings they whispered into your ears under an arbor draped with roses by the Midsummer light of a full moon. So, I'm sure you won't mind if we don't hand you sympathy on a silver platter because you feel you have to now work too hard to maintain your jobs.

Go shove your cry-baby crap where the light of that romantic full-moon don't shine--We the People are out of compassion and understanding. We're done dishing out "understanding" to politicians who betray everything this country was founded on. Turn about is fair play after all. If the serfs have to stand around in bread lines because we can't find jobs it seems only fair that many of our oligarchy should suffer the same fate. Go bark up someone else's tree.

The Democrat Party vs. America

2010-07-06T18:38:00.005-04:00

Today it was announced that our illustrious Federal Government, which is run entirely by Democrats, is at war with the American people. They have filed suit against the Arizona immigration law. I want to underscore this point:

The Democrat Party, the new Socialist Democrat Party, is one and the same as the government by virtue of all the controls they have acquired over the decades suppressing the freedom of the individual; it is the fifth column. It is to be understood, therefore, that in sanctioning this action against a sovereign state, a sovereign state just like all of the other sovereign states of The United States of America, the Democrat Party is now at war with the American people.

That's right. I said it. I mean it. It's true. Any sovereign state has the right to do what is necessary to protect its citizens. To claim this is "unconstitutional" in a Federalist society--is patently absurd. The states will also fight you in preventing and reversing your unconstitutional take-over of our health-care industry. We will fight you against the take-over of various companies and corporations. We will fight your efforts to reverse our industrialized society in the name of global warming. We will fight you because we must--in order to restore liberty, freedom and the constitution for future generations. This war has many fronts and we will fight you on all of them.

These people have been at war with our Constitution and the liberties of individuals for the last 100 years through their regulations, bureaucracies, and radical Left-Wing ideologies. The American people have spoken against you, we will continue to speak against you, and we will win in the end. If you want to put yourselves in this position--then we, the American people, welcome your war against us. Bring it on!

Another Fine Example of Why You Don't Want Socialized Medicine

2010-06-30T14:58:00.000-04:00

VA Hospital May Have Exposed 1, 800 Vets to HIV:

In November 2009, serious safety issues continued to plague a southern Illinois Veterans Affairs hospital even after major surgeries were suspended because of a spike in patient deaths.

According to a federal report, surgeons at the VA medical center in Marion, Ill., performed procedures without proper authorization, patient deaths were not assessed adequately and miscommunication between staff members persisted.

The hospital had been under intense scrutiny since 2007 when a former surgeon resigned three days after a patient bled to death following gall bladder surgery. All inpatient surgeries were suspended within a month.

This is what you will get America when you continue to believe that government is capable of being "compassionate" and "competent". Do you still want to uphold that "we-can-compromise-with-collectivism-a-little-bit" notion? Or, do you want to stop these Utopian tyrants in their tracks? This is the same shit that brought other countries down through history to communism and fascism.

It is incumbent upon the collectivists who live in this country to move to Cuba, or Europe, or Venezuela...or some little island of your own where you can experiment in your Utopian adventures until your little heart is content--and risk your own damn lives to try and make it work. Yes. I'm telling you to get the hell out of our free country if you believe in this crap (and that includes Progressive RINO's as well).

Film Release Announcement: A Marine Story / DADT

2010-06-17T15:29:00.001-04:00

From Susan L. Andrews, J.D. at MarketerBee:

Dreya Weber, is about to have the World Premier of her new film, "A Marine Story", which advocates the repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell". She's worked very hard to get this film produced.

Dreya's last film, The Gymnast, was a huge hit, receiving 28 Festival awards, so I expect this one to do as well or better, both given the subject matter and her increased popularity since the last film (commercials and choreography and performances (Cher; Pink). Feel free to check out their Facebook page and website for more information.

From Frameline LGBT Media:

DIRECTOR: Ned Farr

World premiere! A Marine Story stands up to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell honestly with this unflinching look at the policy’s effects on gays and lesbians in uniform. When a decorated Marine officer unexpectedly returns home from the war, she’s quickly recruited to help a troubled teen prepare for boot camp in this brave new film starring Dreya Weber (The Gymnast).

Release Date:

Saturday, June 19, 9:30 PM

Castro Theatre

Feel free to spread the word about this new film!

A Tingle Up the Leg Has Become a Yellow Stain Down the Pants

2010-06-15T23:57:00.002-04:00

When MSNBC, the crown jewel of the Liberal Progressive media, starts trash talking our illustrious commander-in-chief you know there's trouble in paradise. I think the janitor over at MSNBC has some pee-puddles to clean up under the desks of Olberamann and Matthews. I just have one thing to ask you fools: What exactly did you think you were getting with Barack Obama during the entire time you spent drooling over him? The man spent his entire political career, as others have noted, voting present on issue after issue. He did exactly what you complain about Republicans doing via accepting campaign donations from not only BP but other corporations and you wonder why you are getting the results you are getting? I don't know who is dumber...you for having helped get him elected or the morons in this country who fell for your dumb ass lies and omissions? Granted, John McCain was also a Progressive and not a conservative--our road to hell would have just been a little slower with him. Barack Obama is a Leftist Progressive who doesn't have freedom in his heart, doesn't give a shit about the environment other than for the opportunity it can provide him in destroying this country's economy even further and who is ultimately no different than any two-bit, tin-horn dictator who can spew crap through a microphone over the heads of the adoring crowds below! You elected a Leftist and now you are surprised he's acting like a Leftist! Honestly, if I had the two of you in front of me right now I would knock your heads together and then send you off to the nearest shrink for taking out your "afraid-of-freedom-and-need-big-government-to-wipe-our-asses" neuroses on the entire country. I really, really loathe all of you people who simply cannot get it through your heads that governments never have been and never will be the solution to mankind's problems and that there is a reason our Founders wanted to limit the Federal Government's responsibilities to a few enumerated purposes. If you are disappointed in the lack of competence in how the government is handling this oil crisis, which in many ways was made worse by government involvement, then I can't wait to see you in about 30 or 40 years when our new government-run health care system says neither one of you are allowed to get the surgery you need to remove your heads from your asses because "it's not in the budget." You both truly deserve to rot in your own psychotic hells. Enjoy the beds you have made for yourselves. I have no pity for either of you as you sit there and bemoan the situation you both have helped create.

Breast Cancer Drug Nazi says, "No Drug for You!"

2010-06-13T00:14:00.006-04:00

UK Recommends Against Buying Breast Cancer Drug

In a statement, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence said that lapatinib, sold as Tyverb by GlaxoSmithKline PLC, is not cost-effective [in other words--people become the budget]. The drug costs about 1,600 pounds ($2,300) per treatment course in Britain. Glaxo said the decision would mean about 2,000 patients in the U.K. will no longer get the drug. [Drug Nazi says, "No drug for you! You die!"]

Tyverb is given to women with advanced breast cancer in combination with another drug, after they have failed to improve with standard medicines like Herceptin. There are no other licensed treatments available to treat these women. The drug is widely available in countries including the U.S.[oh...that horribly uncompassionate, obsessed with profit America--how dare you save women's lives], Iceland, Czech Republic and elsewhere.

[my words in bold and brackets above]

Now...let me ask all of you liberal Left-Wing husbands out there: do you want your wife to go through this suffering should she get breast cancer? Or, have you learned your lesson that governments cannot and do not make compassionate decisions first--they make political decisions first?

Or...are we still on the, "Gee...that Soviet Union with the bread lines was great!"...kick???

I'm just wondering--because I think the women in the U.K. who now can't get this drug to save their lives might have something to say about that.

Or...is the planet too populated for your taste and it doesn't matter if a few women die anyway? Hey! You get a two for one! If these women die that means they can't have anymore children to destroy your earthly Utopia either! Two birds with one stone! You Leftists and Progressives really are gettin' your money's worth in this case, huh?

Liberal fallacy strikes again--i.e. just because a few people have trouble paying for their meds under capitalism...let's destroy the whole damn system and make that many more people suffer when the government runs things! No, no...we can't simply find an economically viable way to help those few that need it--because we have a political argument to win once and for all with conservatives!

Yes. And conservatives will be proved correct again with this--just like we have been about everything else since Wilson and FDR. Just makes your blood-boil--doesn't it Liberals?

This is what you have to look forward to America in say...oh...about 5 or 6 years??? Welcome to the evils of collectivism!

Time to Put Aside the "Winning Hearts and Minds" Notion

2010-06-11T03:17:00.000-04:00

I think when we are dealing with a culture that sees fit to hang a 7 year-old boy...we can dispense with the liberal notion put forth by the Bush administration that we can "win their hearts and minds."

No sane person in the present would suggest that it would have been a good idea to "win the hearts and minds" of the Nazis. Neville Chamberlain tried his best at "winning the hearts and minds" of the Nazis and look where it got him and Europe; invaded by a mad-man. This is why the liberal notion that certain aspects of humanity gone bad...can be reasoned with is not only ludicrous but incredibly dangerous. So-called "compassionate conservatives" (liberals) are just as bad.

There are times in history when clashes of cultures become detrimental to the widespread freedom of each sovereign free individual who has a right to be protected from this kind of insanity. If this isn't an example of that simple truth on display--then I don't know what is?

This...is a legitimate function of our government; not providing 300 million people with socialized medicine which will only destroy an entire industry as well as the brilliant careers and talents of those choosing medicine as their profession.

I Will Not Live in the World This Woman Advocates

2010-06-08T21:13:00.002-04:00

Rosie O' Donnell Calls for Communism in America to Confiscate Corporate Assets

I will not live in the world this woman advocates. Everyone says, "Oh, she's just a nutcase. No one listens to her."

Do not be fooled. Her attitude is the attitude of the entire Democrat Party. This is what the Left has become; make no mistake in regards to these people's intentions. If you don't think that every single socialist in the New Socialist Democrat Party doesn't feel this way you are seriously deluded.

"Do not fool yourself by thinking that altruists are motivated by compassion for the suffering of others; they are motivated by hatred for the successful." Ayn Rand

How about we seize your assets Rosie? Aren't you part of the "evil rich" or does your "compassion" give you a pass? And what happens when all of the wealthy people have been punished to your satisfaction and their companies are destroyed Rosie? When their motivation for producing the things that have made you quite comfortable are taken from them? "Then," you say, "they will produce not for their benefit but for every one's collective benefit." No they won't. They will simply go away. Because when man's motivations are stolen he ceases to live the life of man which is proper to man; a purposeful existence providing his own sustenance.

This is the evil we are up against America These nut-jobs mean business. It is time for everyone to decide which side you are on once and for all. You are either for freedom or you are for enslavement; there is no compromise on basic principles which we all know are true about mankind.

Just today a Virginia based insurance company closed its doors citing the uncertainty of the Obamacare legislation as the reason.

The Left wants this. They are happy about this as Tammy Bruce pointed out on her radio show today. When more insurance companies close their doors who will be there to pick up the pieces? The grand, compassionate government and presto! The Socialist Option becomes viable and we begin to watch the entire health care industry along with the professions of thousands of brilliant medical workers go right down the toilet just as it has done in Europe and elsewhere.

Do you think the Leftists care how many people from this company just lost their jobs? Do you think they care about the consequences of their actions? If they did care about the consequences of their actions they wouldn't be Leftists. That is what makes them mentally ill.

...and you want to do what with our healthcare?

2010-05-29T18:33:00.043-04:00

Cicero at American Thinker says in Enemy of the States:

"The people and government of Louisiana have prepared an emergency plan to protect their marshes and bayous from the floating sludge: a chain of barrier islands made of sand dredged from the shallow bottom of the Gulf. The sand barrier would hold the oil offshore, preventing it from destroying the marshes and wetlands, and allow for a much easier cleanup of the oil by catching it on relatively straight, featureless sandy levies -- as opposed to attempting to
clean oil from the labyrinthine bogs, swamps, and marshes of Southern Louisiana's Bayou Parishes.

Alas, bureaucracy and bureaucrats prevent the people from implementing their plan. A permit is required from the Army Corps of Engineers, but the permit must be reviewed and commented on by other government agencies, such as the EPA. Changes to the draft will be required, and approval sought, restarting the process. Meanwhile, after more than eleven days of byzantine bureaucratic fiddling since the plan was submitted by Louisiana, the oil continues to wash ashore, and the State is left to deal with destroyed fisheries, ruined wetlands, and lost jobs. Meanwhile, the bureaucratic square dance continues: Permits and federal training are required to clean up the oil already ashore, and volunteers dare not attempt to clean a bird or amphibian of oil for fear of draconian Federal repercussions. The people of the Sovereign State of Louisiana have a right, and a duty, to protect and defend their homes, their environment, and their livelihoods. Federal incompetence and obstruction are hampering their efforts to do any of those."

I highlighted in bold and italics the important phrases from this article. I want everyone reading the above excerpt from this article to stop and really absorb the consequences of those phrases for just five minutes...and then imagine the Federal Government behaving in the exact same way should Democrat Progressives / Leftists ever achieve their Utopian vision of socialized medicine in this country. I want everyone who believes we need socialized medicine to remember the degree of incompetence with which the Federal Government used in dealing with both the hurricane Katrina disaster and the current oil spill.

Then ask yourself, "Do I really want these fools controlling who gets what treatments--when, where, how, and how much?"

Ever since Presidents Wilson and FDR we have been told, "Just trust the government. It can be compassionate. Look at Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security and how well they're doing."

Never mind the fact that all three of those programs are broke. They are no longer anything but shell games where money is moved from one place to another. They are programs we have all paid into with taxes contributed out of our paychecks. The money is no longer there. Politicians have pissed it all away.

The good people of Louisiana can't even protect their own land and homes--because of bureaucratic red tape...and now these same Progressives and Leftists want to do what with our health care? I don't think so. All of the high prices we currently see in health care--are not because health care is expensive but because we are treating illegal aliens and we have already distorted the free-market of health care by distancing people from what they pay out in insurance and already existing government programs. Capitalism and the laws of supply and demand can't work because they are already hindered to such a degree that distortion of the prices can be the only outcome. We are constantly told that the free-market in health care does not work. It does not work because government and politicians distort it!

Think about it! When you shop for any other commodity that the government does not regulate--you know what things cost. You can tell if something is a little more pricey in one store than in another store. You can pick and choose from where you buy your products. You can pick a place or supplier that fits your budget the best. People have become so distanced from what things actually cost in regards to health care--they can't make those decisions. That is partially what drives up the cost!

Ayn Rand stated in The Virtue of Selfishness:

"The only proper, moral purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence—to protect his right to his own life, to his own liberty, to his own property and to the pursuit of his own happiness. Without property rights, no other rights are possible."

In other words, a government's only legitimate purpose is to protect it's citizens from violence, foreign enemies, and to create the proper environment in which individual men may achieve their self-actualization--to become what they were meant to become. Government's purpose is not to: provide health care, homes, clothing, food, cars, or any other product used for man's survival or his pleasure. When governments start turning those aforementioned items into "rights" then you are becoming a communist or fascist state...and you are by default losing freedom. There can be no other outcome.

From the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights and the Principles of a Free Society:

A free society is one where the government does not interfere (by penalty or reward) in thought, production or trade. A free society requires a separation of:

Church and State
Science and State
Education and State
Economics and State

Our Founders already gave us separation of church and state. However, that has also been distorted by Leftists who see religion as their enemy since they want government to play the role of "God" in people's lives. We no longer talk about freedom of religion in this country but instead we hear efforts aimed at achieving freedom from religion; these are two different concepts--with two different outcomes. Understanding those differences from a philosophical perspective is important.

Separation of Science and State: There should be no funding of science with citizen tax-dollars. All science should be completely privatized and they should receive their funding from private organizations. Think of how many taxpayer dollars we waste debating issues of tax dollars going to science programs that have moral issues attached to them. If scientists are forced to get their funding privately--then citizens can choose whether or not they want to deal with organizations who contribute to those scientists.

Separation of Education and State: We only need to see the horrific consequences of our Federal Government getting involved in our education system--rather than leaving it to the states and local citizens where it belongs. The kids are getting dumber and dumber--and that's not by accident. When you have governments setting the agenda of what children learn--you soon end up with Hitler Youth. Need I say more?

Separation of Economics and State: Capitalism is what it is. It should be left free to work on it's own. Capitalism has natural cycles that go up and down even when it is left to it's own devices. Keynesian economics was devised, in part, to prevent economic downturns. It has made them worse. When government distorts capitalism there is only one place you can end up and that is in the toilet.

For more information on those four concepts see the links above.

America--we must start demanding our leaders implement these ideas. Our Founders were intelligent men who understood these concepts. They understood some of those concepts better than others. Future philosophers like Miss Rand amplified their intents and helped to close the gaps they left open. The future of our country and our freedom as individuals depends on it. Leave Leftism and Progressivism behind in the dust-bin of history where they belong. Learn these concepts for yourself and let's lead America forward into a new Age of Enlightenment.

Socialized Medicine: The Gay Boys Do Like Their Trysts--Not On My Dime They Won't!

2010-05-26T12:59:00.027-04:00

Everyone who promotes socialism or collectivist societies love to image a Utopian vision where we are all absolved of any personal responsibility we have towards our own individual health or worries about cost regarding our health. Over at Pajamas Media I discovered an article, Why America Hates Universal Healthcare: The Real Reason, which addresses the kind of spying, fascistic, little animals human beings are turned into when these types of programs are instituted.

Ayn Rand, in her novel "Atlas Shrugged" addressed the kind of twisted human beings people turn into when collectivist programs are instituted. She treated this as a story within the larger story of the novel. She used the fictional Twentieth Century Motor Company within which to frame the tale. If you have not read Atlas Shrugged--reading this excerpt shouldn't ruin anything for you. I highly recommend it.

If we ever get socialized medicine in this country then I am going on a personal crusade to ban: adult bookstores with backrooms, the porn industry, the drug trade, gay (or straight) bathhouses, prostitution, gay pride parades where sex is practiced openly in the streets, and internet porn along with anything else that promotes or smells like irresponsible sex practices. If I have to start paying, with my taxes, for the stupidity of gay men (or women) or straight men and women who choose to be stupid then you haven't seen anything yet. If you think I'm a "right-wing nut-job" now for simply wanting to limit government to it's constitutional foundations--you just wait until I start my crusade on banning the behaviors of gay men/women that would force my taxes higher to pay for their stupidity.

My crusade will not extend only to the gay community. If any of my friends choose to invite me over to their homes for a nice summertime picnic or holiday get together you can expect the following: hot dogs, hamburgers, any salads made with mayonnaise, cookies, candies and any packs of cigarettes I find--will all be gathered by yours truly and into the trash they go. I will raid your cabinets and throw out packages of chips. I will gather every drop of liqueur you have in the house and dump it down the sink. I will rip the chocolate milk, lollipops, brownies, and ice cream cones right out of your children's hands.

As Ayn Rand said, "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Either dump this socialism crap or deal with people turning on each others' bad behaviors that lead to paying higher taxes. You can't have it both ways. If you want me to fund the health care of other people, complete strangers, through my tax dollars then I have every right to go around demanding people stop doing things that cause people to go to doctors or hospitals for their out of control behaviors. On the other hand, if the American people get smart and force the politicians and the federal government to get the hell out of medicine altogether rather than continually distorting the market through government programs (thereby forcing prices to rise higher)--then I will continue to be the nicest, sweetest, little social libertarian you ever did see--and then gay men can continue their bareback orgies, blow jobs in back alleys and bookstores, drugs and drug parties that promote this bad behavior and then I will happily leave them alone to do as they wish.

Gay men and women have spent how many decades fighting to be able to love the people they want to love? And now you have the gay Left handing, in the form of socialized medicine, another tool for social theocrats to use against them? You are a bigger bunch of idiots than I could have imagined.

As a social libertarian, I tend to believe that people should be left alone to make their own mistakes--and I do occasionally speak up regarding the self-destructive behaviors that lead to gay men and women dying; I couldn't live with myself if I didn't. If gay men and women get pissed at me for telling them the truth--then they can choose to not listen and get pissed at me. But, at least I've said my peace. I've exercised my right to try and help them and they can exercise their right to listen or not; neither party is overtly harmed by the experience. However, when socialism hangs a leash around your neck--connecting it to every other neck in society--then all bets are off and we can demand of each other anything we please.

That is, philosophically, how and why socialism and communism, in the end, destroy every society they touch. Leftism, Progressivism, Modern Liberalism all feed off of the worst aspects of humanity and amplifies them to the "N'th degree."

If you are a gay man or woman reading this who enjoys your liberty to live like a hedonistic pig if you so choose...ask yourself this: do you really want to give me or anyone else the fodder to rob you of your pleasures? Be careful what you wish for.

Bill Press from The Reading Eagle: When You Put Down Your Vitriol Then We Will Do the Same; Otherwise--Prepare for War

2010-05-24T20:51:00.017-04:00

I am getting a little tired of being told by Leftists to "play nice" when the very fabric of our Republic and free-market is at stake. Progressive Leftists learned long ago that they could not collectivize a society by using guns to intimidate and enslave the populace; so, they replaced their guns with hate-filled rhetoric. They use this tactic to pit people against each other while Progressives work behind the scenes to steal liberty from the people. I have news for you, Mr. Press, Americans are onto this tactic. Many of us have been on to this tactic for a long time while at the same time wondering why our fellow citizens did not appear to see the same thing. The jig is up Bill. Even Jeffersonian Democrats have been enlightened as to just how much the hard Left has hijacked this nation.

Mr. Press, in his latest article, Easy way to end hate-filled talk radio is simply to turn it off, apparently believes certain men and women from conservative talk radio are too "toxic" and too "hate-filled." Democrats use words like "toxic" and "hate-filled" when Conservatives tell the truth about the real intentions of Progressive Democrats. He refers to them as members of the "radical Right." What exactly, Mr. Press, is radical about limited government and the preservation of capitalism--which are the only two conditions under which men can retain their God-given rights as free individuals? The title of his article should be: "What Democrats Have Wanted for 100 Years: Total and Complete Economic Control Over the Citizenry Because We Can't Win Debate Any Other Way."

Mr. Press believes these various hosts to be off base when describing the truths about the top-down tyranny this country has been evolving towards in the last 10o years via his beloved Progressive politics and Progressive Presidents such as Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

Mr. Press may be asking himself, "Why would a gay man defend conservative talk show hosts?" Well, Mr. Press...I learned something ages ago which you apparently have yet to learn: conservatism / classical liberalism and the Judeo-Christian foundation upon which this nation was built is precisely why I can be a gay man in this country while not swinging by my homosexual neck. In case you have not noticed, sir, all of the countries who promote collectivist policies such as you do--eventually massacre not only their own citizens--but, many times various minority groups within those countries who become "problematic" as well. As a gay man I certainly do not agree with all stands taken by some conservative hosts especially when it comes to civil recognition of gay relationships. But, I can guarantee you this much--I do agree with them on some basic principles: limited government, capitalism, common sense national defense, and individual liberty--not to mention promotion of moral and ethical standards to our young people via objective education where they are taught how to think critically as opposed to being taught what to think via Left-Wing collectivists who choose to rewrite our history. I have listened to all of the talk show hosts that Mr. Press has mentioned in his article quite extensively over the last decade. And I can tell you this much--the only hateful rhetoric coming from these hosts are toward the hardcore Progressive Left-Wing that has hijacked the once-great Jeffersonian Democrat Party and their tactics of divisiveness which they use to keep people at each others' throats...why don't you address that hatred Mr. Press?

Now...to address some of the article assertions, point-by-point:

"Both were lamenting the increasingly ugly rhetoric that has replaced legitimate debate about the issues on right-wing talk radio. It's the very phenomenon I explore in my new book, "Toxic Talk: How the Radical Right Has Poisoned America's Airwaves."

My response: Let me know when your book reaches the kind of sales numbers Mr. Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny" or Mr. Glenn Beck's "Arguing With Idiots" reaches--then we'll talk.

"Rush Limbaugh still holds the title of hate-monger No. 1. Without providing any evidence from Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's speeches or writing, Limbaugh daily calls her a socialist and accuses Democrats of rushing into confirmation hearings before her radicalism is understood by the public."

My response: It seems Mr. Limbaugh's assertion that Elena is a socialist is not quite the lie Mr. Press wishes it was. Here is her thesis for your enjoyment. In the last paragraph of her thesis she writes:

The story is a sad but also a chastening one for those who, more than half
a century after socialism's decline, still wish to change America.
Radicals have often succumbed to the devastating bane of sectarianism; it is
easier, after all, to fight one's fellows than it is to battle an entrenched
and powerful foe. Yet if the history of Local New York shows
anything, it is that American radicals cannot afford to become their own worst
enemies. In unity lies their only hope.

Seems pretty sympathetic to socialism to me--not to mention the fact she thanks her radical brother for many of his ideas; Leftist poison does tend to run in families.

Mr. Press referring to Glenn Beck: "This, of course, is the same talk-show host who, in total ignorance of the Gospels, warned Christians to run out of their churches if they ever hear the words social justice or economic justice because, according to Beck, those are just code words for communism and Nazism."

My response: Mr. Press...here is an article that will help clear up your ignorance about whether or not socialism is in the Bible. And I would also ask you, Mr. Press, if someone hires a hitman to do their killing for them--does it make them any less culpable for the murder? I think not. The same goes for socialism. Just because you elect representatives to our government to do your stealing for you--makes you no less culpable in the theft, sir. Not to mention--we are discovering that some churches are indeed preaching social justic and economic justice from their pulpits. These are code-words for socialism and communism. One only has to recall the revealing aspects of Black Liberation Theology preached by Obama's own pastor--Reverend Jeremiah Wright. The Bible never condoned stealing from one person to give to another. Theft is theft, Mr. Press. As a Left-Wing Progressive I would also ask where your concern is regarding a link that is being constructed between church and the state? Hypocrite.

"Mark Levin attacked Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor as a radical leftist and a bigot."

My response: Attached is a particular cut from one of Mr. Levin's shows where he breaks down Justice Sotomayor's attitudes about race. Whatever she may be--she is certainly not color-blind.

"Michael Savage, perhaps the most vicious of all, once told a gay caller, 'You should only get AIDS and die, you pig.'"

My response: This particular statement has been run through the liberal meat-grinder. While I am not a fan of his particular method of enlightening people regarding their own behavior--Mr. Savage worked, in the early 80's during the onset of the AIDS crisis, as a nutritionist in a San Francisco clinic serving gay men. When he mentioned to many of them that perhaps going to gay bath houses and sleeping with a few dozen men in one evening was not a good thing and perhaps they should be shut down--the gay community turned on him. The gay Left strikes again, "We're all dying from AIDS due to our own irresponsibility and recklessness--how dare you try to care about us!" I rest my case.

"Ever since 1987 and the end of the Fairness Doctrine, which freed station owners from having to provide any balance on the air, conservatives have dominated talk radio to the point where, according to a 2007 report of the Center for American Progress, there are at least 10 hours of right-wing talk for every one hour of progressive talk."

My response: That really eats at you Lefties doesn't it? The fact that, when the Fairness Doctrine (a restriction on free-speech by manipulating the free-market) was ended, Conservative talk-radio ballooned in the free-market of ideas; meanwhile, liberals stations such as Air America have barely been able to keep their heads above water.

"What's the answer? Progressives need to get in the game by buying their own radio stations, for starters. Bringing back the Fairness Doctrine might also be part of the answer, but Obama's already said he's against it."

My response: Go ahead! Buy your own stations! They'll go broke...but, hey...have at it! The less money you have--the more freedom-loving Americans won't need to be tortured by you! And bringing back the Fairness Doctrine? So...you're in favor of limiting free-speech?

...but, in Mr. Press's next paragraph he says:

"Censorship's clearly not the answer. The First Amendment protects all speech, even ugly speech. It also guarantees every American the right to make a fool of himself, as long as there are enough other fools willing to listen."

My response: It's clearly not the answer as long as Mr. Obama, as you previously stated, is against it? But...if Mr. Obama were for it...you would support it wholeheartedly? I'm so confused by the intellectual trapeze flips you are doing, Mr. Press. It would be so much easier to follow you if you could just learn to put two plus two together to equal four! No wonder you guys on liberal talk-radio have such a problem with your ratings--nothing you say makes any sense!

Your dream, Mr. Press, for conservatives to just sit down and shut up will not happen. It will not happen unless the Far Left fringe is once and for all purged, not only from the Democrat Party but from the governmental bureaucracies as well--thereby returning the party to its classically liberal roots. Until that time, Mr. Press--I suggest you keep preparing for war.

The Washington Post: 10 Fictitious Tea Party Myths--Not so "Fictitious"

2010-05-20T11:01:00.057-04:00

While doing some political research for something else I came across an article written by Steven Levingston in The Washington Post on 5/19/09 entitled "10 fictitious Tea Party beliefs". I simply couldn't let this ridiculous article slip by the radar of my readers. My counter-points below directly correspond to his ten points in his article. One would think the author of this article was writing, not a serious political piece, but instead a comedy skit for Saturday Night Live! Actually, most of the article is written in the typically false intellectual, sneering way most modern day Liberal Progressives (Leftists passing themselves off as patriotic, constitutional loving Americans) present themselves--as if the rest of the world is just too stupid to understand their insanely "compassionate" policies and, "Oh...if the little people would just give us a little more of their private property we could solve everyone's problems for them in the blink of an eye." I almost expected the author to quote one of Keith Olbermann's Shakespearean "holier-than-thou" diatribes somewhere in the article. He should have! The snotty tone of Olbermann's elitist rants certainly would have fit right in!!!

The author does very little in proving any of his points by providing actual concrete evidence to back up his assertions. And that is what they are...assertions based on emotional premises. As you can see upon reading the article--the author's main purpose is to try and discredit the political power of the Tea Party movement as some "Republican" phenomenon. In reality, the Tea Party movement crosses the entire political spectrum and involves people from all walks of life and political persuasions. I would presume, as the Tea Party movement continues to gain victories for those of us who actually love freedom and our Constitution, we will find more and more Liberal Leftist elites losing their sanity--as if they had any in the first place! People who still cling to historically worn-out, collectivist philosophies are either 1) so stupid and ignorant they don't know what they are doing or 2) continue to promote these things to satiate their own temper-tantrums at having lost the historical argument about the effectiveness of collectivism ages ago. Classical liberals and conservatives won the argument--so the only thing left is the utilization of Saul Alinsky's method of berating and belittling to discredit the opposition. The days when Liberal Progressives will get away with that--are long gone.

The Democrat Party used to claim Thomas Jefferson as the founding father heading their party's platform. Thomas Jefferson, frankly, would be rolling over in his grave if he saw the blind usurpation of political power over the people as the Federal Government continues to grow into a massive leviathan with an insatiable appetite attempting to gobble up, collectively, what is left of the free Republic he and the other founding fathers gave to us. The Democrat Party has a new "founding father" as it's mascot--his name is Saul Alinksy. The author of this blog along with so many others will no longer allow the Democrat party to get away with attempting to pass themselves off as something they are not. It's a secular, socialist, freedom-destroying party. Myself and others will continue to force the party to swallow those ugly truths if we have to ram them down the party's collective throat (no pun intended) like a pair of dirty gym-socks.

Let me move on to address each of Mr. Levingston's 10 emotional temper-tantrums with some Randian "A is A" logic. Each of the ten items listed below will directly correspond to his items in the article:

1) Mr. Levingston's assertion that the "birther movement" is strictly a Tea Party phenomenon is ridiculous. Are there some who would call themselves "Tea Partiers" who are not satisfied that President Obama's eligibility has been proven to their liking? Of course. There are also non-Tea Party members who assert the same thing. Aside from that--liberals only have themselves to blame about any sort of "truther movements" which are used against them. They created truther movements long before the birther movement came along. To quote my gay conservative friend Steve Flesher, "The truther movement was born of radical liberalism." Liberal Progressives should have thought about the fact that "truther movements" could be used against them with just as much fervor as the moonbats in their own party used them against others. I only have to cite the 9/11 truther movement as an example. This is simply another case of Liberal Democrat stupidity that backfires and blows up in their own faces. You can't complain about Frankenstein terrorizing the villagers when it was you who provided the electricity to bring him to life.

2) Regardless of whether "death-panels" actually exist in the health care bill or not--is irrelevant. As with most liberal debating tactics--this is nothing more than attempt to misdirect the conversation away from the actual truth of a particular issue. The objective truth of the matter is--whenever any government across the globe has attempted Soviet-style, collectivist health care the results are conclusive--rationing becomes a necessity sooner or later. Economic reality dictates that when you are collectively offering a product to people--eventually matters of cost become part of the equation and human beings are no longer treated as human beings but as part of a "budget". Death panels don't need to be written in the bill. Any intelligent human being with an ounce of common sense and the ability to see the horrific results of government run health care would see that it doesn't work. Logically, that would then lead the intelligent individual to ask themselves, "If government run health care makes things worse rather than better--what would the next logical course of action be?" Answer: Don't do it. Again, however, when you are dealing with Liberal Progressive Democrats you are not dealing with reality or logic. Government run health care benefits one group of people only--politicians who need another excuse to increase political power and control over the people. Government run health care is another issue Democrats lost the war over ages ago--and to satiate their temper-tantrum and having lost that argument--they would sooner torture America citizens in a futile attempt than simply admit--they lost. Every one may be covered for health care in Canada and Europe...but not everyone gets health care.

Human beings cannot be "collectively controlled"...because we're all individuals with our own minds and our own free-will. This is why all collectivist attempts throughout history don't work...and in the end...they create a soft tyranny which eventually leads to a harder tyranny.

My friend Steve Flesher from GayConservative.org had this to say on the matter, "'Death panels' was a term used to describe what is inevitable under a public health option. I would refer liberals of any stripe to a 1980's interview Margaret Thatcher had with Sir Robin (Britain's male version of Katie Couric in the 80's) where Mrs. Thatcher first of all had to defend her decision to pay separately for private health care. Then she had to defend her policies which forced a conservative to correct a 50 year old socialist disaster. She then showed Sir Robin about 20 front-page articles from 1979 (before she was elected) which showed children and cancer-stricken mothers fighting for their life because of waiting lists where governments decided who went first. Also, take into consideration how most of the hysteria over the illegal immigration bill in AZ has to do with liberal assumptions on the basis of what could happen. 'They might racially profile' even though there is language strictly prohibiting it. So, Palin wasn't allowed to make an educated guess on the basis of 50 years of Britain public options and waiting lists, but liberals can make stretches based on...nothing? Let's not hold our breath waiting for PolitiFact to rank this 'lie' since it's coming from the left."

Democrats also assert the success of programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security as a defense for government run health care. Considering all those programs are bankrupt and becoming economically insolvent--they may want to go back to..."We're doing it to be compassionate."

The entire purpose for Liberal Democrat health care policies is ostensibly to relieve people of the worry of having to deal with economic consequences when it comes to their health-care. While that is a nice Utopian notion...it doesn't deal with reality. In reality, doctors spend enormous amounts of time and money learning what they need to learn to become good doctors. Liberals, as always, have it bass-ackwards. The question isn't, "What do the patients need?" The question is, "What do the doctor's need?" If Liberals spent time finding out what doctors would need to make their jobs easier and allow them to be more effective--then doctors would be able to get more affordable health care to more people. Instead what you get is an emotional premise built around so-called "compassion" which ends up destroying the entire medical industry rather than making it better. However, when you are dealing with irrational fools who base their positions and premises on their emotions rather than on reality--this is what you get.

3) Whatever Obama is...he is not a free-market capitalist. Levingston says, "...one week Obama was a Socialist, the next he was a Communist, then a Fascist. Then it was on to Marxism and Maoism..." It's curious that Mr. Levingston carves out Marxism as it's own separate entity. Socialism is Marxism. Maoism was based upon Marxism. Leave aside the fact that Obama is certainly not a capitalist and here is what you have:

a) An unholy alliance between business and the Government--which is the very definition of fascism. If nationalizing the banks and controlling the car and oil industries through the Federal Government simply by virtue of the bailouts they were given isn't fascism...then I don't know what is? And I don't care which party does this--it's wrong either way. A truly free society demands a complete separation between capitalism and the government...with the government neither rewarding nor penalizing businesses for any purposes.

b) If Obama doesn't hold Marxist beliefs...then why all the self-avowed Marxists or Marxist admirers in the administration? EX: Anita Dunn, Van Jones.

c) Christmas ornaments with picture of Mao in the White House. I bet that's the first time in our country's history that this ever happened.

d) Saul Alinsky is documented to be an Obama mentor. The Clintons used the Cloward-Piven strategy to help put us in the economic dire straights we are in as well. ACORN used Cloward-Piven strategies in their "community organizing" efforts.

I really don't need to go any further with this. The evidence speaks for itself.

4) Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan, has three anti-gun decisions to her record. And from the same article "Kagan Opposes Second Amendment Gun Rights":

"The bottom line is that Barack Obama supports the Chicago gun ban, a position he publicly repeated as recently as June 26, 2008 (the day the Heller decision was released). President Obama believes that there’s nothing unconstitutional about your city—or even your whole state—completely banning you from having any firearms for hunting or self-defense, even in your own home."

5) Cap and Trade (should it pass)...and health care (should we eventually have a public option) would all be funded by tax increases that will hit the middle class particularly hard. Where do liberals think the money will come from? The magical money tree? It's not all going to come from the evil "rich". Cap and Trade will hit small businesses who are responsible for most of the economic growth in the country and one only has to look at the tax rates people pay in Europe to help cover socialized medicine to know where a public option would lead eventually. Isn't it curious how the same party that claims to look out for the "little guy" consistently abuses and tortures...the "little guy"??? Once you have a complete top-down government, rather than bottom up as the Founders intended, you end up with only 2 classes of people: the rich politicians who in their infinite wisdom toss benefits out to the masses a la Eva Peron and the poor serfs on the receiving end. There's only one destination big government leads to--and its' not freedom.

My friend Steve Flesher from above also stated, "Obama has spent $4 Trillion in less that two years. Bush spent that same amount in eight years, so yes, he has quadrupled the Bush spending. Just how do liberals think all this is going to get paid for and who is it going to come down on? I am sure Sarah Palin knows the answer to this, yet, she's probably afraid that her 'lie' might be ranked number one for 2010 by PolitiFact."

And as the final word on taxes I leave you with this quote from James Madison, "History records that the money changers (that would be the Federal Reserve) have used 'every form' of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments, by controlling money and its issuance."

6) I'm less interested than Mr. Levingston is in who or who is not carrying around Presidential "Hitler Signs". The fact of the matter is Mr. Jonah Goldberg's well-researched book "Liberal Fascism" may have been "demolished and angrily dismissed by academic historians" (in other words Left-Wing lunatic professors)...but, it still does not dismiss the fact that Modern Liberalism is Leftism. The modern Democrat party's purpose--is to grow government; not protect individual freedoms. That is in direct violation of what our Founders saw as the only purpose of good government--to protect Natural Rights and individual freedoms--not hand out "free" shit. Socialized medicine has more in common with Hitler's Germany than it does a free-market, capitalist society based upon individual Natural Rights in which free men and women are allowed to keep the fruits of their labor rather than have it confiscated to create an unattainable "Utopia". The Modern Liberal has also taken up the cause of radical environmentalism to get their agenda past the nose of the American people. Hitler was an environmentalist as well. Do I claim that people in America are about to thrown into ovens? Of course not. But big government promoting liberals have more in common with Hitler than your conservative or classical liberal who chooses to protect Natural Rights and individual freedoms. People often bring up the fact that Hitler actually hated communists. It wasn't so much a matter of ideological difference--it was a matter of "which tyrant promoting which kind of collectivism" would be the one to win out. Not to mention..."Nazi"...stood for "National Socialist German Worker's Party".

7) Regardless of the outcome of the debate over global warming...doesn't logic dictate that until science is able to prove one way or the other whether it's real or not...that all governments refrain from taxing themselves into poverty in order to prevent something which hasn't been proven one way or the other? Duh.

8) Levingston says, "According to the same myth makers, this nonexistent new army of health care police was going to start throwing people in jail if they failed to buy health insurance -- though in fact, the only penalties contemplated for such failures are fines and taxes." Oh...well then...as long as it's just going to be more fines and taxes from the IRS...that's much better. I've never heard such a stupid statement in my entire life! I needed to hold my stomach with that one!!!

9) 70,000 people on 9/12 or 2,000,000??? Who cares? We still took out the Democrats in New Jersey and Massachusetts and we will massacre them come November. Go count grains of sand. It would be a better use of your time

10) Levingston says, "...with the help of corporate financing." Is that the same "corporate financing" that the Democrats have put themselves in bed with? I just thought I'd ask since--if it's a bad thing that political parties get in bed with corporations...then perhaps the Democrats should stop doing it? What's that saying about "those who live in glass houses"? The more that both parties get out of the habit of manipulating corporations or using them to further their own ends (which is fascistic)...the better off and more free we will all be.

I do actually want to praise President Obama for one thing--he has opened the eyes of Americans who, up until this point, were ignorant about the dangerous, collectivist forces working behind the scenes in our great nation against the cause of freedom. To those who say we are a more divided nation now than ever before I say this, "Obama has brought people together...Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, liberals, blacks, whites, gays, and straights...against him and what the Democrat Party has become! We couldn't have asked for a better moron to show Americans what not to do!"

And...just so there is no misunderstanding about where I stand in regards to the Democrat Party and the way in which it currently operates ideologically based upon Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals": if you are an individual that promotes this and applauds this...you should be tried and hung for treason to your country. If you are not promoting freedom--you are not promoting America. It doesn't get much simpler than that. Now I'm sure there are some out there saying, "Hey! Free speech! It's my Constitutional right to support things like socialism and communism." You are absolutely correct. You are entitled to be an idiot. However, I am also entitled to push back against the PC and relative subjectivist crowds who assert all ideas have equal value by informing you you are an idiot and that there was a reason this country was founded as a nation for free people under the economic system of capitalism. Not all ideas have equal validity...and not just because our Constitution and our Founders say so...but also because people should be intelligent enough about history, economics, and philosophy to understand why some things don't work. If you are not--it's your own damn fault! And I refuse to accept the notion there is no such thing as treason to one's country anymore just because Democrats don't like to be talked back to. There is such a thing as treason and if our Republican politicians don't have the courage to call you what you are--then I will! Cheers and have a great day!

Bye, Bye Baby...Bye, Bye!

2010-05-19T00:27:00.009-04:00

Picture courtesy of The Drudge Report

Well, well, well...the betrayer is himself betrayed. All good things must come to an end Arlen...well, in your case...not so good. It looks as though the Democrats screwed you...just as you screwed your Republican voters. I can't imagine how that could have happened. However, since every actor needs some music to exit stage left by...below is yours. And please...don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out:

A Warning to the GOP: You're the Grand 'Ole Party for a Reason

2010-05-13T01:15:00.039-04:00

Americans have built into their genetic code a love for freedom. Many of us understand that economic freedom needs to be numero uno on the scale of important issues; without economic freedom no other freedoms are possible. We bicker and piss and moan with each other over other things; abortion, gay marriage, war--to name a few. In the end, however, we realize fiscal responsibility and accountability from our government are paramount.

The GOP has been given, as Mr. Dunn states in his article "Will the GOP Wake Up and Smell the Tea?", a second chance.

"There will not be a third. Learn the lesson of Robert Bennett, or go to the wall."

I have never seen in my life anything like the political and social unrest that currently exists in this country. I was still a child when Jimmy Carter was in office and I have vague memories of the long gas lines and hostage situation in the Middle East.

The American people know when we are being played by our leaders. We don't respond well to the contempt that rains down on us from politicians on high who seem to think we don't really know what is being done to us. It might behoove the politicians to actually stick their heads out of their rabbit holes once in awhile to actually pay attention to what we're saying...no screaming...at the top of our lungs. Of course, as of now--we are so pissed that should you stick your head out of that rabbit hole you may just end up as hossenfeffer on a platter.

Let me state this as plainly as I know how: GOP--you are going to be given a second chance. However, I can guarantee you--and I can tell this from the degree of political research I perform online--We the People have become organized to a degree which I'm not so sure has ever been witnessed before. Organizations, groups, citizen advocacy, government accountability websites--all have exploded in number. It would be extremely unwise of you to believe that once you are elected--we will simply shut up and go away and recede back into the American landscape like the cherry tree that George Washington never chopped down. It would be a mistake for you to say, "It's okay--everything is fine now. We can go back to our backroom deals and playing both sides against the middle again."

Americans are looking for meaningful reform and accountability the purpose of which is to restore our liberties. Ignore us at your own peril. I am fairly certain this time should you ignore and demean us again...we will have another changing of the guard at the voting booth. We mean business. From many of the indications I see--there is not much regard for either the Republicans or Democrats at this moment in time. There is a massacre coming in November...and there will be another massacre should the next set of crooks betray us. We are not going to go away.

You are the Grand 'Ole Party for a reason. You are supposed to be for limited government, personal responsibility, fiscal freedom, and common sense defense. You are supposed to uphold our beloved Constitution. Your duties do not include--appeasing Left-Wing Socialist ideologues. The Democrat Party has become, without a doubt, socialist and leftist in nature. We don't expect you to work with it. Your belief that Americans want what they have to offer is erroneous in nature. It is not true. We don't want what they are dishing out. However, we don't want what you have dished out either prior to 2006. Either get it together--or pay the price--again.

Take the warning to heart. Ignore us at your own peril.

Abortion: What's the Common Sense Approach?

2010-05-11T19:11:00.054-04:00

I recently had a discussion with another gay conservative friend of mine who had posted something regarding abortion. Two gay men discussing abortion...isn't that a trip?

I'm not going to get into the wisdom or lack thereof of the Supreme Court decision regarding Roe V. Wade. The purposes of this post will be more philosophical and Objectivist in nature. I will only say this in regards to Roe V. Wade...we have Federalism in this country (i.e. States Rights). Our Founders meant for the states to make many of their decisions on their own for the precise reason that when the Federal Government or the Supreme Court gets involved in blanketing the entire nation with policies and decisions--they steal away the rights of the States and free individuals. The entire purpose behind federalism was to allow conservative states to make their own decisions that their populations found acceptable and for liberal states to make their own decisions that their populations found acceptable. If the people living in a particular state didn't like their state's policies...they could vote with their feet and move. In that vein--I personally find Roe V. Wade to be extremely...unwise. Real societal evolution and progress (with a small "p") have never been bestowed from governments onto their populations. Free men and women as individuals provide that. Any government's purpose is to secure the Natural Rights of individuals--in other words--keep them free and protect them from violence. Government's purpose is not to tell people what they can or cannot do. Otherwise, you are no longer living in freedom. Enough said.

As for the current Leftist views on the rise which promote abortion to be allowed on demand, at all costs, regardless of the psychological and physiological outcome to mother or child for the purposes of population control (eugenics)...is idiotic and reckless. We have done that throughout history already; it was called Nazism, Stalinism, and Communism...and we know where those policies led. I regard Leftists as psychological throwbacks adhering to philosophies which should have died out long already.

Ayn Rand's view on abortion was as follows:

An embryo has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being. A child cannot acquire any rights until it is born. The living take precedence over the not-yet-living (or the unborn). Abortion is a moral right—which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved; morally, nothing other than her wish in the matter is to be considered. Who can conceivably have the right to dictate to her what disposition she is to make of the functions of her own body?

I take her Objectivist view a step further and delve into the psychological and educational realm. From a personal perspective, I'm not entirely sure I agree with her that an embryo is not an actual being. However, my purpose is not to inject my personal view--but, instead inject some rationality into the discussion on the timeline prior to the woman finding herself in the position of having an abortion in the first place. The argument as to when a person is a person has been going on for ages already...and still...no side can claim the mantel of victory on that. Conservatives believe a person is a person from conception forward. Liberals tend to believe a person becomes a person sometime after that--and even among themselves that changes from one person to the next. So, even liberals can't agree among themselves; six weeks, no 16 weeks, no when the head emerges from the uterus. Yeah...give it up. You have no clue. As of now, scientifically, there is no way for that answer to be determined. And I'm completely unwilling to accept the view of scientists who accept their funding from politicians and the government--because that automatically throws suspicion onto their motives (see the current debate regarding global warming). For this reason, Ayn was an advocate for the separation between science and the government. This is also a view I advocate since we waste entirely too many tax-payer dollars berating each other back and forth over scientific discoveries and methods that have moral and ethical implications attached to them. If scientists get their funding privately--that leaves citizens free on their own to decide whether or not to continue supporting that particular private entity. I have a feeling we will only discover definitively when a person becomes a person around the same time science is able to prove God exists; in other words, probably never. The fact that this question as to when life begins cannot be answered implies perhaps the issue is not abortion itself but with something else entirely. Something which perhaps some people don't want to admit to themselves because it involves personal responsibility?

By now I'm sure all my readers are breathlessly saying to themselves, "Oh! I can't wait to hear who Chris says is right and who is wrong!!! "

From my view--as an Objectivist--you are both right...and...you are both wrong! Ha!!!!

Everyone, as a matter of freedom and free will, has a right to their own bodies. In that regard, libertarians and liberals (not Leftists) are correct. People have to be allowed to make their own mistakes to learn from them. However, from a moral and ethical perspective, conservatives are correct. Young women should be taught to have moral and ethical respect for their bodies which can only come from self-esteem so they don't find themselves in the position of deciding to have an abortion in the first place. The typical Left-Wing feminist attitude has been, "Hey! If men can sleep around and be pigs--I can too!" How about actually teaching our young people to have healthy, sexual attitudes in conjunction with good relationship skills? Young men should also be taught to, not only have respect for women and their bodies, but should also be taught the moral and ethical ramifications of fathering a child. Conservatives cannot get upset about people having control of their own bodies; especially in an age where we are discovering the degree to which the Nanny State can take hold and tell people how much salt to put in their bodies. You cannot scream about the government telling you what to eat and what not to eat and then turn around with any sort of credibility and try and tell people they don't have a right to their own bodies. Liberal women and feminists (not the Left-wing kind who put their Leftism first) shouldn't get upset with conservatives attempting to inject morals and ethics into the conversation saying, "You can't tell me what to do with my body!" Teaching morals and ethics in regards to how we treat each other and how we treat ourselves and our bodies is not a matter of telling you what to do with your body. It's a matter of arming young women and men with the knowledge they need to live respectfully among each other and giving them the self-esteem needed to do so. Whenever morals and ethics are thrown out of society with the trash...usually that very same society ends up in the trash. We know this to be true from history.

Americans have been brain-washed, mostly by Leftists, to believe that moral and ethical thought is an act of discrimination. Leftists promote moral relativism for the precise purpose of breaking down the civil society so they can re-build it into their own image; usually to make themselves feel better about themselves. It's a matter of psychological projection usually. This inevitably results in a top-down tyranny--the results of which they believe will bring about the same Utopia all dictators throughout history have imagined to be possible.

The only people benefiting from this continued anger among American citizens over this issue--are the politicians. They have learned how to pit the citizens against each other over issues which, more often than not, they have no business sticking their noses into in the first place.

As an Objectivist, I say this:

Liberals--reign in your secular, religiously emotional attachment to your view. Conservatives--reign in your theocratic view of what you think God wants or doesn't want. Everyone--start to inject some Age of Enlightenment rationality and reason into the discussion. We are free men and women and we deserve the freedom to succeed...and fail...on our own. If the ideological right/left paradigm is abandoned in favor of some common sense and objectivity--we might just find we can have both freedom and respect for human life? What a concept! Elevate your thinking process above what you believe to be true, either emotionally or religiously, and give yourself and others the benefit of what is actually true. And what is actually true is that, when young men and women are given the proper psychological, ethical and moral support and education, more often than not, they will make the right decision. As for the future of America, our unborn children deserve the same respect and rational discussion...because without them...we have no future.

Hating the Government: Becoming Fashionable?

2010-04-15T13:34:00.034-04:00

...well...let this gay man who, of course, has his finger constantly on what has become "fashionable"...tell you, "Yes it has!". And it is about time! I think Americans have been long overdue in expressing their hatred of what our political system has become; a tired, worn out, predictably disappointing, two-party, unoiled machine sucking the free citizens dry of every last ounce of freedom we have left.

In his article "Hating the government finally goes mainstream", Chris Stirewalt says:

"It's not about the Pauls themselves or the guys with the "Don't tread on me" flags It's about the people at home who might not be willing to march in the park or join the next Paul money bomb, but who don't blame the folks who do."

The Democrats, no matter what they may have been pre-Wilson and F.D.R, have been outed--finally--as the radical left-wing, Hugo Chavez-style Marxist party they have become. After decades of double-talking themselves to death for the precise purpose of hiding their true intentions from the American people--they have exposed themselves completely. Let's hope more of that occurs. The party has been co-opted by Modern Liberals*--the snobby, the uptight, false intellectuals who believe (as all Leftists have historically believed) that they can micro-manage society, as Mark Levin called it, into "a utopian fiction of his mind's making." The Progressive, Modern Liberal, Lefist--whatever you want to call them--believe their Utopian efforts are only frustrated by those of us who do not share their vision. Except those of us who do not share their vision--don't share the vision because we know why it doesn't work--not simply because we don't like Progressives, Modern Liberals or Leftists. From his book "Liberty and Tyranny" Levin states:

"For the Statist, liberty is not a blessing but the enemy. It is not possible to achieve Utopia if individuals are free to go their own way. The individual must be dehumanized and his nature delegitimized. Through persuasion, deception, and coercion, the individual must be subordinated to the state. He must abandon his own ambitions for the ambitions of the state. He must become reliant on and fearful of the state. He must abandon his own ambitions for the abmitions of the state. His first duty must be to the state--not family, community, and faith, all of which have the potential of threatening the state. Once dispirited, the individual can be molded by the state."

After reading that last paragraph--I think much of the demagoguery from today's Democrats (and organizations which support them such as the ACLU) leaves a sour taste in the mouth of any sane American. The attacks on faith, dividing people into class groups, minority-grievance groups, and the constant demonizing of capitalism--the only economic system devised whose very existence is necessary for the maintenance of freedom--come from the very party who claim they are the party of "the little guy". No they are not the party of the little guy. They are now a party controlled by their malignant egos constantly agitating for more and more government intervention on "behalf of the little guy". It has nothing to do with the little guy--it has to do with their egos. Modern Liberalism--the religion that dare not speak it's name. Because being a "liberal" comes first to the liberal--before anything else; before God, before family, before their own community. The individualist and liberty-lover puts those other things first.

On the other side of the fence, we have Republicans--not conservatives--but Republicans; a party infected by apologetic conservatism. In other words--political pussies. "We're sorry we believe in limited government and freedom. The liberals are correct--we need more government control--but, we can do it better than them." In the last week we've heard Senator Tom Coburn (R) chastise FOX News for being critical of Nancy Pelosi. "She's a nice lady." Senator Coburn, I have news for you. Someone can be "nice"--and be completely destructive at the same time. Being "nice" doesn't invalidate her maniacal devotion to her own destructive Leftism. We have also witnessed Mitt Romney stating that we must praise the President when he is correct on some things. Hey Mitt--a little friendly advice: the American people are fed up with the loss of our freedoms. Stop telling us when to praise the statist and when not to praise the statist. The statist--because he is what he is--need not be praised at all but dissected as the historical thief of freedom that he is. That is what Ronald Reagan did best--he dissected these people for the psychological and philosophical failures they are. Let's all stop being "nice" shall we? Now either get on the bandwagon and get your head out of your ass--or suffer the consequences.

Excuse me, but when was the last time you heard Democrat Leftists say of a Republican colleague, "He's really a nice man--you must just get to know him / her." You don't hear it. You get what Mark Levin likes to call instead "Stalinist show trials" taking up Congressional time and tax-payer money such as those directed at Clarence Thomas--a man who understands originalist jurisprudence. And then--the party that supports the black American--the Democrat party--proceeds to do everything necessary to destroy the man's reputation and career simply because he left the Democrat Party slave plantation. The new Democrat Party slogan should be: Become a Democrat! We'll Help You Maintain Your Victimhood Status Come Hell or High Water!!!

I digress.

Back to the RINOS. When was the last time you heard a Democrat say, "The era of FDR is over." And yet, big government Republicans tell us constantly, "The era of Reagan is over." Ummm...no it's not. Liberty and freedom never go out of style. The era of FDR is the era that is over. That era was over when the Soviet Union fell. That era was over when the Berlin Wall came down. Collectivism has been proven historically, psychologically, and philosophically--not to work time and time again down through history. It is time conservative / libertarian Republicans reclaim the mantel of freedom and drop the wishy-washy, I-need-to-save-my political-ass-therefore-I-will-jettison-freedom-principles-to-do-so crap.

As the article above points out--Americans of all stripes are joining the freedom movement. Republicans, conservatives, independents, moderates, and yes, even Democrats (I guess those with a brain left in their head). We're fed up pretty much with both parties. We understand that more than likely--those that will take the energy of our movement and use it for something constructive will be of the Republican persuasion--we don't much give a damn if there's a "D" behind the name if they are committed to doing the right thing. Although considering how the Democrat Party has been co-opted by the psychologically damaged and hard-core leftists (I know--redundancy)--it's unlikely it will come from that party.

I highly suggest those of us that understand this movement not allow its energy to be lost to political morons who are fearful to do what is right--i.e. limiting the power of the Federal Government.

*I always differentiate between Modern Liberals who are Leftists and Classical Liberalism--the philosophy embraced by our Founders and other greath thinkers of the Enlightenment.

Update on Where I've Been

2010-04-09T23:39:00.003-04:00

To all my readers:

I just wanted to let you know that I've been rather busy with moving residences. I have not abandoned my blog and will be back soon! I will continue to contribute to Right Pride and GayConservative.org as well.

There are many great things happening in the cause of freedom across the country and I look forward to continuing my commentary.

Thank you all for continuing to follow me!!!

Best Wishes,

Christopher Budden

Busting Down the Gay Conservative Closet Door

2010-03-15T16:59:00.004-04:00

"Mark Ciavalo, conservative gay activist, recently launched Right Pride, a Nevada affiliate of GOProud, a new national gay conservative group." says The Las Vegas Review Journal in their latest article Political Eye: Group for gay conservatives launches.

Mark has launched Right Pride, a gay conservative blog, affiliated with GOProud. GOProud is a national gay conservative organization launched with the help of Jimmy LaSalvia--a former member of the Log Cabin Republicans. I contribute occasionally to his blog over at Right Pride as well as www.gayconservative.org.

More gay men and women than ever before are realizing that conservatism offers a home for those who believe in the concepts of individual freedom, limited government, a strong national defense and common sense governing. Collectivism destroys gay lives just as much as it destroys anyone else's lives. I'm happy to see more and more gay men and women out there who realize this simple fact.

Congrats Mark! This was a great article!!!

The Frankfurt School: Institutionalized Subversives

2010-02-24T22:00:00.019-05:00

There has been much discussion of late regarding The Frankfurt School. Andrew Breitbart has mentioned the Frankfurt School in recent speeches, social medias have been flooded with shared information, and conservative talk show hosts have discussed the methods of the Leftists at length. You can look up The Frankfurt Institute online and read more in-depth. In short, from the website Catholic Insight in an article by Timothy Matthews entitled The Frankfurt School: Conspiracy to corrupt, he says:

"What was the Frankfurt School? Well, in the days following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, it was believed that workers’ revolution would sweep into Europe and, eventually, into the United States. But it did not do so. Towards the end of 1922 the Communist International (Comintern) began to consider what were the reasons. On Lenin’s initiative a meeting was organised at the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow."

"The aim of the meeting was to clarify the concept of, and give concrete effect to, a Marxist cultural revolution. Amongst those present were Georg Lukacs (a Hungarian aristocrat, son of a banker, who had become a Communist during World War I ; a good Marxist theoretician he developed the idea of ‘Revolution and Eros’ - sexual instinct used as an instrument of destruction) and Willi Munzenberg (whose proposed solution was to ‘organise the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilization stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat’) ‘It was’, said Ralph de Toledano (1916-2007) the conservative author and co-founder of the ‘National Review’, a meeting ‘perhaps more harmful to Western civilization than the Bolshevik Revolution itself.'"

Timothy then provides a list of their goals in the effort to break-down the civil constitutional society:

1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion.
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children.

Note: As a gay conservative, I will cut them some slack on separating homosexuality from sex in general. They are a Catholic magazine and entitled to their teachings. The point about sexualizing our children, however, is not lost on the reader.

4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority.
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking.
7. Emptying of churches.
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime.
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits.
10. Control and dumbing down of media.
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family.

I learned of this list from Mr. Michael Savage's radio program. Initially, I was going to provide examples of each of the above items to justify my assertion that our society is being ripped out from beneath us--just as Mr. Savage did. However, the article speaks for itself--there's no need. This article testifies to the degree to which Leftists in this country have been successful in their goals.

It is not sufficient for the constitutional conservative to gain office and simply tinker with what the Leftists have done to our nation. The aforementioned items must be exposed for what they are to the public at large with an explanation of the purpose...and then these things must be confronted, reversed, and then finally...destroyed. Of course, when I say, "destroyed" I mean that in the political sense of the word. I do not want anyone taking away from this post that I am advocating an armed Revolution to take the country back to it's limited foundation. However, if we don't have the resolve to do it at this time in our history--our children may have that burden placed upon their shoulders in the future. If we want to spare them that violence--then I suggest Conservatives (and the Republican Party) get their acts together and screw their courage to the sticking place; confront the Leftist, out their lies, explain to the masses the Leftist mind-set and expose it for what it is. We must take back everything they have stolen from us. We must take back the schools, media, objective journalism, and the free-market. We must destroy the bureaucratic agencies they have instituted as a fourth branch within the government to worm their way around the Constitution. We must drive them from the judicial benches. They have learned what they cannot win through the ballot box can be dictated from the bench. Originalist judiciary must be made the standard again.

Those efforts are only half the battle. We must then begin to teach our children the concept of personal responsibility, what it means to take care of themselves, and to help their fellow human beings on their own when possible rather than relying on government to force compassion. The conservative has always said (and is philosophically correct) that without personal responsibility there is no freedom. Even the most un-religious or non-spiritual person who understands the concept "thou shalt not steal" can not possibly support that action and then claim they are not a thief. When any nation sets itself on this course--its destruction is not far off. The very notion of "forced compassion" is an oxymoron. We must provide our business leaders with the tools to not only run their businesses--but, to run them from an ethical and moral perspective. As a lover of Ayn Rand and Objectivism--I would love to see her ideas taught to all of our businessmen. Capitalism can only be maintained when free men have trained themselves to be responsible with it.

It is not good enough for the every day American to sit back and only concern themselves with raising the family and concerns of career. We must all become engaged. Passivity is no longer an option.

If we do not do these things...we will lose the battle to save our country, the constitution, and our freedoms.

Picking Nits & a Radical Proposal

2010-02-17T21:44:00.034-05:00

“If you saw Atlas [the producers of society], the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the heavier the world bore down on his shoulders—what would you tell him to do? To Shrug." Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

I recently had a conversation with a Libertarian friend of mine, Mr. Jonathan Reed. His responses below were after reading a list of 10 "free-market" health-care suggestions put forth in an article from The Wall Street Journal entitled Ten GOP Health Ideas for Obama by Newt Gingrich and John C. Goodman. The responses are in order as he stated them and were at the core of what I thought were the most viable to use for the purposes of getting my point across:

"The GOP has no interest in shrinking government, only managing what the Democrats have instituted. If they cared about limited govt, they'd realize that this cancer needs to be removed from our society. If you're worried about the elderly, rather than continue this bureaucratic hemorrhaging of money, you phase it out. First, eliminate all regulations on doctors, providers, insurance companies, etc. Then give everyone over the age of 55 $10,000 a year in a Health Savings Account. Raise that $5000 for every 10 years they age after 55. The rest of the population should start saving their $$ in an HSA from the day they get a job. Second, make insurance companies act like insurance companies. They should stop paying for every GD doctor visit or stress test! Use insurance the way it was meant to be used - as protection against catastrophic financial loss."

When I pressed Jon regarding the issue of a public already high on hand-outs and finding people with the political will to not simply manage the damage the Democrats and Progressive Republicans have done over the last 100 years but instead reversing it--he had this to say:

"Oh, the public will not like it one bit. It's like getting someone hooked on heroin, then taking it away. But in a few years, the issue will be moot because there will be NO HEROIN. Foreign countries will stop enabling us by lending us money and the money the government prints will not have any value. We're going to become the Wiemar Republic and Zimbabwe."

"One way or the other, people are simply going to be denied what they, by law, are entitled to. When that happens, people will probably do what they've been doing since the dawn of man - provide for themselves. People can't imagine a world where the government isn't able to give them free shit. I mean, how else can we possibly give our children an education, or pay for medical care without government??? Well, they didn't live in a time when government didn't do any of that stuff. Despite popular belief, they didn't crawl around in the mud looking for morsels of food to eat."

Jon also mentioned the capacity for politicians from both sides of the aisle to blame capitalism for the downturns, recessions, and depressions we experience. In reality, it is precisely because of politicians and the government meddling in our economy that we have the problems we have.

John Prothro in his article, Obama Is Not a Socialist at Lasting Liberty, basically picks nits over whether or not Obama is a Socialist or an interventionist; the difference between government controlling the production or simply sticking it's fingers in to "rectify its evils." In my mind, it doesn't matter. One is just as bad as the other. Look at the tremendous fall-out we experienced from the government trying to "rectify the evils" of the housing market and the housing markets need to only provide financing for homes to those who could afford it. Your typical Leftist would call the discrimination against those who couldn't afford a home as one of those "evils" of capitalism. First of all, what makes your typical liberal lefty believe that everyone wants or deserves to own a home? Not everyone is meant for home ownership for all kinds of various reasons. But this drives home the collectivist attitude of the Left. They completely believe that the government can know what is good for an entire population of 300 million people...and then when they institute those "heart-driven" policies--you end up with a crash and everyone suffers. They then come up with a million reasons why it didn't work.

Here is where the "radical proposal" part of my blog post comes in. I am beginning to believe that the only way capitalists, individualists, and freedom-lovers will ever be able to drive home this point to these top-down tyrannical types is by doing precisely what people like us were eventually forced to do in Atlas Shrugged. We have been going down this road with them for the last 100 years--actually all throughout history--and they simply will not learn their lesson; no matter what we say, no matter what the results of their own policies are in front of their own noses--they never, ever learn! I am beginning to get to a point where I am ready to say, "Okay. I give up. Let the liberal lefties have at it. Let's give them complete control over the government, the economy, our health-care, the car companies, the oil industry and anything else they can think of. We will stand back and allow them to micro-manage the producers (the rest of us) and allow them to attempt to squeeze out the imperfections of man-kind's existence to the best of their ability in the belief that they can provide us with Utopia. We won't stand in their way. We won't say a word of opposition."

...and then wait and see what happens.

I know exactly what would happen. Society would crumble and then they'd be screaming for us, the capitalists, the individualists, and freedom-lovers, to come save their asses from the misery they had induced. At which point we would then say, "Fine. You want us to do that? Then you will do it our way. You will learn why we were correct in our reasoning and you were not. You will then let us institute separations between capitalism and the state, science and the state, religion and the state (we already have this), and education and the state. We will put these separations into the Constitution and you will henceforth shut up forevermore about your belief that you can micromanage humanity into a Utopian, heaven-on-earth vision."

I really am beginning to believe this is the only way we are going to get through to these people. They will learn no other way unless we absolutely leave them to their own devices. It sounds harsh. It sounds extreme. But, what is the alternative? Do we continue to pull the band-aid off slowly and allow our own torment and our children's' torment at the hands of these people for decades to come or do we say, "Enough is enough!" then rip the band-aid off all at once and allow them do what they want thereby getting the misery over with that much faster? I'm sorry...but, I've had it with these people. I'm all for the second option. Not only that, but think of the damage they've done already to the heads of some of our kids in school! We have entire generations still coming of age who have been brainwashed by the Left to believe that they're entitled to something rather than having to work for it; that everyone deserves a trophy and that nobody deserves to get a red pen mark on their test. If we shrug now--we can at least undo that mind-set ingrained in our kids once they see what happens!

I say, "Let's shrug now and get it over with. It's the only way they are going to learn the lesson."

The Shining City on a Hill: The Utopia the Left Fails to See

2010-02-16T13:46:00.007-05:00

Joel Kotkin takes on liberal "Euro-philia" in his article America's European Dream: Pundits unwisely want the U.S. to emulate the old continent.

The Left pines endlessly for the days when the Divine Right of Kings was the way, the truth and the light.

What is it with liberals that they can't handle liberty which by necessity must include failure as well as success? Honestly, it's like they need big-daddy government to take care of them because they're too incompetent to take care of themselves. Of course, I've always wanted a big-daddy too...but, that's a whole other story. It really does make you believe that they really do suffer from that "five-year-old mentality" conservatives accuse them of having. It is true I suppose--freedom is too scary for some to handle.

They say we should be more like Europe. The European continent is languishing under fiscal depression, Sharia encroachment, and population malaise (which for the Left is a good thing--they see humanity as a virus). We left Europe to be free and live in what Ronald Reagan called "the Shining City on a Hill." This is what the Left doesn't understand about America. We ARE, because of capitalism, the Utopia that they think we don't have because we're not Socialist. Stop looking for a perfection that is not achievable in anything humanity does--simply because we are imperfect. Nothing is perfect. Nothing ever will be...but, in the words of Mark Levin when describing our extraordinarily and technologically advanced health-care system, "Some things are more perfect than others." Are there things that can change in regards to the insurance companies? Sure! You can make better what we already have while keeping capitalism intact which then keeps freedom intact. That all can be done without Socialism which would destroy all that wonderful innovation. The Leftist liberal lives in Utopia and doesn't know it, realize it, or chooses to ignore it for their own narrow ideological reasons. Many of them, as I have stated previously, understand what they are doing when they promote socialism--because it's about political control and not really doing what is "good" or "right". Capitalism is as good as gets for humanity. Sorry to bust your bubble Lefties. However, now that it is busted--shake the haze from your heads and enjoy what you have in large part due to capitalism and be thankful!

Never Too Early to Derail the Clinton Train

2010-01-29T14:19:00.038-05:00

Peter Roff, in his 1/27 article A Hillary Clinton Primary Challenge to Obama in 2012?, speculates on whether Hillary will challenge Obama in the 2012 election:

"The chatter has increased in recent days about Clinton leaving the cabinet sometime in the first term, likely over some matter of principle, so that she can position herself to challenge Obama in 2012. Perhaps it is just wishful thinking on the part of those Democrats who have already grown tired of Obama."

Prior to Obama taking office there has been much discussion regarding Progressivism. What is it? Is it compatible with our Founding? What is the difference between Progressivism and the original intent of our Founders, the Constitution, and individual Natural Rights. It is not compatible with Classical Liberalism or a Conservative thoughtful understanding of this most wonderful gift our Founders gave to us.

It has disturbed me to still hear a large number of people defending the Clintons. These two are Progressives. Despite Bill Clinton saying, "The era of big government is over" we see him now defending--big government. During the Presidential debates running up to the 2009 Presidential election we heard Hillary Clinton, in an astonishingly honest moment, admit that she was a Progressive which "has a real American meaning going back to the early 20th century." There is not one thing that is remotely American about Progressivism. It is Marxism dressed up in a pretty sounding name. Instead of an armed Marxist Revolution we get a slow creep to tyranny. Progressives, Marxists in disguise, have an inherent contempt built into them that says, "I have no faith in you as an individual to live your life on your own. You are just too stupid to understand the depth of my 'compassion' for you. You must be controlled for your own good." This has been the underlying thinking process of all Leftists down through history. You would not have a friend in your personal life that has this much contempt for you--why on earth do we settle for allowing these people to manage and control the reigns of government???

I understand women of this nation wanting to see, in their lifetimes, a woman in the White House. I understood the black community wanting to see a black man in the White House--despite the foolhardiness of making that the singular issue upon which many of them made their decision to vote for Obama.

The Tea Party and 9/12 movements have made great strides in bringing Progressivism to the forefront of the public consciousness with educational segments provided by Glenn Beck. Numerous books have been published on 20th Century Progressivism which have also been helpful in allowing the public to understand what this ideology embraces--and none of it has anything to do with being "American". Three excellent books on Progressivism are Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Progressivism, New Deal or Raw Deal, and A Patriot's History of the United States.

I will say it now--anyone who votes to put this woman in the White House, after all we have learned about the damage done to this nation by Progressivism poisoning both parties, will be engaging in an "anti-American" activity. That's right...I said it. Because Progressivism is...anti-American. It has no place in our politics or our government. Progressivism must be beaten back and defeated...not promoted. Progressivism is what has given us many of the things which have placed undo burdens on American free-individuals--the Progressive income tax among them.

If you are an individual who prides yourself on believing in and following the intent of our Founders which included dignity and support for individual freedom--you cannot then turn around and vote for this woman expecting that she will do anything other than grow the government. Some might be tempted to say, "But, if the Republicans have Congress and can block what she does..." Nope! Sorry! Doesn't fly. We all understand the unprincipled temptation of too many Republicans who have been poisoned by Progressive ideology and are often too happy to go along with it--especially if it means giving a President what they want during the "Honeymoon." Let's face it--if Hillary were in office right now instead of Obama she would be doing the exact same things in regards to health care that President Obama is trying to do. Can you really say that you don't believe after the failure of Hillary-Care in the early 90's that she wouldn't want to finally have her chance at pushing it through? Come on! Give me a break. I can't even say that she would be that much better on foreign policy. Some of the things she has done have been dubious to say the least.

As a free country--we simply cannot continue on like this. Progressives, no matter which party they inhabit, are going to be our undoing. That's not rhetoric...it's a fact...a cold, hard fact. Republicans who simply work to maintain these poisons instead of working to reverse them are equally culpable. Too often, Republicans don't have a solid grounding in our history or philosophy in order to beat back Progressive rhetoric and unravel their arguments and explain why they are lying and what they are trying to accomplish. To make it worse...when Conservatives get the reigns of government--they waste the opportunity to turn back the clock. There is no grey area. There can be no compromise any longer. Bi-partisanship for the modern Democrat Party means Conservative Republicans give in to us--it never means Progressive Democrats give in to Conservative Republicans. That is part of the tactic.

There are probably folks out there reading this and are now saying to themselves, "Oh...that's silly. America will never 'fall'." Really? The Romans never thought they were subject to a "fall" either--and where are they now? Hillary must not be allowed near the White House. If we continue to coddle these people and say, "They are Americans too"...this nation will fall. That is a promise I can guarantee.

Georgie Porgie Puddin' and Pie--Kissed the Libs and Made Them Cry!

2010-01-26T02:53:00.008-05:00

Tony Gallardo in his article, "George Did It" from American Thinker perfectly describes the hysterical and unbelievable sliminess with which the Left in this country has for placing responsibility for all of their failures and damaging policies over the last 100 years...on everyone except themselves. Of course...what else would they do. Democrats, as a matter of habit, wallow in this behavior like happy pigs in shit. "The ends justify the means" is the cry we constantly hear. Ultimately, this is nothing more than the permission they give themselves to lie...and lie with abandon if it means solidifying their political power and cementing their god-like vision of themselves forever into their minds. Accept--real Americans see them for what they are.

What do they lie about? Conservative racism, sexism, homophobia, hatred for the poor (simply because we know economic freedom means personal freedom). I could go on. For some who are ignorant of political philosophy--they really believe what they've been told. For others--they're devious enough to know what they're doing and do it anyway.

It's all Georgie's fault:

1) Fanny & Freddie, Democrats.
2) Banks forced to make loans to people who couldn't afford them by laws passed by-- Democrats.
3) Social Security bankrupt, Democrats.
4) Medicare / Medicaid bankrupt, Democrats.
5) Taxed out of our skulls with the Progressive income tax, Democrats.
6) Car companies nationalized, Democrats.
7) Banks nationalized, Democrats.
8) Oil companies unable to drill, Democrats and the EPA which is supported by Democrats.
9) Farms drying up because of bogus fear over fish. Democrats.
10) Corporate taxation to tamp down CO2, a natural greenhouse gas--well, not quite yet, but they're working on it. Democrats.
11) Gay men and women screwed with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", Democrats.
12) Black inner city neighborhoods taxed into mini-welfare states. Democrats.
13) Sky-rocketing insurance premiums due to competition prevented across state lines, giving lawyers a free-for-all to sue, Democrats.

Yep! It's all Georgie's fault! Not only did the man have to clean up the mess Osama Bin Laden left behind and secure our nation, a legitimate function of the government, but he was also entirely responsible, apparently--for cleaning up every mess made by Progressive Democrats and some Progressive Republicans over the last 100 years.

Some Democrats reading this would say, "Hey! You can't lay all of this at the feet of Democrats. There were entire decades where Republicans had almost full control!"

Ummm...yeah. You would be correct about that. However, there's a difference between a Conservative and a Republican for one thing. The electorate, in their defense, can't always tell whether a Republican President they vote for is actually a Conservative until he starts governing. For another thing, when Republicans or Conservatives do have the reigns--it makes reform pretty difficult when you already have such massive bureaucracy and stoned liberals running around with their "rule-books" to turn back the hands of time on all the damage that HAS been done over the last 100 years. But, that's the plan isn't it Lefty swine? Creep us one step at a time down the road to political tyranny. Two steps forward, one step back. Isn't that how it goes? As Glenn Beck has recently pointed out--the Left knows they would never get a real Marxist revolution with guns past our noses--so instead, they choose "evolution"; a slow creep to tyranny over the decades. Bit by bit. Well, we're on to you. Some of us have been on to you. However, those of us that have had our eyes open--are now opening the eyes of our fellow citizens.

Yours Truly Had His Conservative Credentials Questioned!

2010-01-20T21:45:00.056-05:00

That's right folks. A Facebook "friend" questioned my conservative credentials. Since I've been on Facebook I have had zero run-ins like this...and I have a vast number of both Libertarian Conservatives (classical liberals) and religiously faithful conservatives on my friend list--and I have had completely friendly and civil discussions with all of them on all sorts of issues. The particular issue that seemed to set him off was in response to something I said regarding gay marriage. I won't use his real name--I will simply call him "Angsty". I did not correct spelling or grammar--just pasted as is from my page. Below is the exchange:

Chris: "Ahhh...very true William. However, I AM lucky enough to live in the one country on earth where there should be equal treatment under the law for everyone! ;-)"

Angsty: "If you keep thinking and voting (for Lefties I'm sure) the way you do, it won't be free very much longer. If you open your eyes, you'll see that Radical Islam is making a push for World dominance! England is expected to be a Muslim majority nation by the year 2020! Our current joke of a President is a Muslim! You are voting for, and moving in, ... the direction of less freedom! It is amazing to me how somebody can be so blind!!! You also probably believe that Adolph Obama's healthscare plan is going to be cheaper for AMERICANS and give you better service than the private sector! Please tell me that you are not that shallow!"

Chris: "William! What? How long have you been following my page? I'm as conservative as you can get as a gay man...LOL! Actually...I'm more of an Objectivist. I'm for the smallest governmental footprint possible that allows for the most freedom of everyone. And...I didn't vote for Obama...where did you get that from?"

Angsty: "Look, just because you have a 'Scott Brown' emblem on your profile means nothing to me. I read what is written Christopher and ...and Christopher...there is nothing that you have written on this topic that sounds anything to me like you're a Conservative, however, you respond to me by saying, first..."I am lucky to live in the one country on ... earth where there should be equal treatment under the law for everyone!" (definitely an argument traditionally made by a Left-wing Gay), and your comeback after my reply was "I'm as Conservative as you can get as a gay man". What the Hell have you said that indicates you're a Conservative?!"

Obviously he was making assumptions about me based on the gay marriage issue alone...and even that was a conversation I had never engaged in with him before. This gentleman had maybe been on my friend list for only a few months--but, in all that time, with all of the things I have posted--he calls me a "left-wing gay"??? You have got to be kidding me! I have openly challenged the gay Left on their beliefs and behaviors on numerous occasions! And I do it with fervor! And not only the gay Left--but, Leftists, Marxists, Stalinists, anti-capitalists period! I loathe what these people are doing to this country!

Let me make one thing abundantly clear regarding my "equal treatment under the law" comment. As long as the Federal Government has given itself the ability to be handing things out to various groups of people--then it should be "equal treatment under the law"...period. I am not even entirely certain in my own mind whether I agree with gay marriage or simply civil unions. Marriage is a religious and spiritual institution which carries moral and ethical considerations that go along with it. And, thus far, the gay community--especially the gay Left community, has done very little to convince me they are worthy in their behavior regarding their relationships and how they treat each other and those with whom they disagree to warrant the recognition of religious institutions. For now, until that changes--I tend to lean more towards civil unions. I have always said and I still say now--that if the gay Left wants it to be called "marriage"--then start acting like you are worthy of that spiritual bond. I don't accept the lame excuse the gay Left usually gives that "straight people are pigs too" or "straight people don't value their relationships either" arguments. Two wrongs don't make a right. Our Founders bestowed upon us a civil society--a civil society I am very much concerned with upholding. One of our Founding Fathers said it best and Mark Ciavola from Right Pride has this on the header of his blog:

"Act worthy of yourselves." - Dr. Joseph Warren

In other words--if you want respect then start acting like you deserve it.

I did not vote for Barack Obama. I have been fighting the Marxist takeover of 1/6 of our economy in the form of healthcare. I loathe the weakness that Obama has shown in regards to the War on Terror and with protecting this nation in general. I mean--give me a break. Obama had credible evidence ahead of time regarding the Christmas day shooting and instead of being a commander in chief and at the very least going to camp David for Christmas--ran 6000 miles away from Washington, D.C. to Hawaii--as far as he could get! I absolutely despise the nationalization of our industries and banks and the capitalist cronyism that the Democrats have engaged in; something they have no trouble bitching about when Republicans do it and yet when they are in control it is perfectly okay. Not it's not! Not from either party! Let your goddamn hands off our economy period! Both of you! Trying to control the economy for social engineering purposes over the last thirty years is what has gotten us into this mess!

This man, I believe, got it into his head that he needed to bring me down on the gay marriage issue alone--because it is something he obviously disagrees with. However, to take that and completely ignore every other position I have ever taken on a variety of issues in order to drive the wedge home--is completely unacceptable. Suffice to say--he's been removed.

I can disagree with someone without being disagreeable (accept for Leftists--they don't count and need to be pushed back at all costs)...but, when you call me a Leftist? Watch out sister! Them's fightin' words! 'Cause this bitch has claws!

Picture: Courtesy of Lady-Bunny. And no. It isn't me! LOL!

The Day After...a Reflection

2010-01-20T14:59:00.002-05:00

Well...here we are. Scott Brown won the senate seat in Massachusetts. For many of us involved in the the Tea Party movement across the country it is clear we have won a great victory in sending a message to the politicians in D.C. We are making our voices heard...and it is a good thing! We have much to proud of. Many Democrats have already begun back-peddling on their assumptions about what kind of "mandate" they mistakenly believed the America people gave them when putting them in office. However, the hard work is not complete. We must also resist the tempatation of presuming Scott Brown is necessarily a conservative. We have all discovered the horrible things that can happen when presuming someone is something they clearly are not. We have yet to see how Scott will vote on a variety of issues. Among those issues:

1) Cap and Trade (Tax and Spend)
2) Amnesty
3) Healthcare

Scott could very well stand on the Conservative platform and help to kill all of these disastrous issues by voting against them. He could also betray us--and vote for all of those things or on variations of those things which would still drag us closer to top-down government.

I have a personal message--a friendly one:

We have given you a great opportunity to do the right thing--not just for Massachusetts--but, for all people across this nation regardless of the state in which they find themselves. I ask you to retain your integrity and take to heart the position in which we have placed you. The grassroots are watching--and we will hold you responsible for your positions. If they coincide with ours--we will continue to support you. If they do not...well, let me just say...it won't be pretty. That's not a threat. It is simply the reality of where the American people are at. We are tired of the crap. We are tired of government theft of our incomes. We are tired of government believing it has the right to "nanny-state" us to death. America is built on the concept of individual freedom--not collectivism. Freedom, by necessity, must include failure as well as success. We don't want government micro-managing our lives. We simply want you to do what you are constitutionally mandated to do. Nothing more. Nothing less. Washington D.C. has proved they are incapable of running anything with any sort of competence. Limited government is the way to fly baby! And we will expect it of you!

Scott Brown Wins Massachusetts!!!

2010-01-19T21:59:00.007-05:00

Congrats Scott Brown! I'm proud of you and I'm proud of Massachusetts for standing up against the Marxist idealogues in the government and for sending them a strong message! You are the man of the hour! Now go kick some Leftist ass!

To Barack Obama and the Democrats...the song below is dedicated to you!

The Tea Parties: Anti-Government or Anti-Bad Government?

2010-01-08T22:45:00.013-05:00

While Kimberly Schwandt's article Tea Party Movement Poised for Strong Start in 2010 is, in general, a good article--she says something which I have heard repeated by other "journalists" (in quotations because I don't think such a thing exists anymore). By definition, journalists are supposed to be objective. Since most of them are Leftists with a few exceptions--they are not objective. I am in no way suggesting Ms. Schwandt is a Leftist--I'm merely making a statement about journalists in the general sense. But I digress.

"Last year, the 'tea party' movement succeeded in capturing national headlines with its boisterous anti-government protests."

Let me make one thing clear. Our Founders understood that government can be a fearful force. Thomas Paine in Common Sense said it best, "Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."

We have allowed too many people to take upon themselves a benevolent view of government, politicians, and the legislative nightmares they foist upon the citizenry. Our Founders were not "anti-government". They knew some government was necessary. However, they restricted the power of the government to the protection of man's rights as a free individual--not the promotion of a Communist / Fascist collective. When you view government from the former perspective you then need to use your reason and your mind prior to allowing a politician convince you that what they want to do "is for your own good." When you view it from the latter perspective you are automatically lead by the nose down the path to tyranny. One is rational; the other is not. When a citizenry is lead by the "irrational" they are eventually destroyed by what Ayn Rand described in her novel, Atlas Shrugged, as "the grinding chaos of the irrational." If you don't know what the "grinding chaos of the irrational" is--see the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and the Theocratic Middle East.

Not one thing our government presently engages in represents anything rational; socialized medicine, Cap and Trade, nationalization of banks and businesses, confiscatory taxation--basically any taxation for anything other than legitimate governmental purposes. Re-distribution of wealth is not one of those legitimate purposes.

This last note is for any businessmen who may be reading this:

You must, by any means necessary, sever yourself from all collusion and connection with the government. Stop taking funds. Stop allowing politicians to place unreasonable demands on you and your business. You must do this! You must all ban together if necessary to do this! Ban together and make demands on the politicians! Don't allow them to place their demands on you! Because I promise you one thing--these politicians, even though they hold out their hand with an appearance of benevolence...they will screw you in the end and by default the rest of the population! I promise it! It's history! Understand it!

The Gay Left: Free Your Mind, Your Neck, and Your Freedom

2010-01-05T15:41:00.002-05:00

I recently tagged Obama Appoints 'Trans Woman' to Commerce Department; Gays Hail His 'Rocket Pace' of Diversity on Facebook with the following sentiment:

"And again, when the gay Left community is thrown a bone, no matter how small--they practically strangle themselves on their chains to reach for that bone like the good little Democrat, boot-licking, dog slaves they are; never mind that Obama has screwed the gay community because they are a minority to be used and abused in the Leftist effort to destroy all of their other freedoms; despite his stated belief that marriage is between a man and woman. But, maybe that's too much TRUTH for some to handle. Ouch!"

I know that sounds harsh--but, sometimes the truth is harsh. As Ann Coulter has stated, "The truth cannot be delivered with novocaine."

I will not be used like this anymore. Leftists down through history have used minorities and the disenfranchised as an excuse to provide themselves with more governmental power for the purposes of instituting top-down tyrannies. The Democrat Party and other Leftists have been doing this for centuries, not just to the gay community, but also to other minority groups including women and blacks. Every true effort for any particular group to be treated equally under the law has been hijacked by Leftists in this same manner. When this happens--equal treatment under the law is no longer the priority; growth of governmental tyranny is the priority. To the Gay Left I say this, "Continue to celebrate--because while you are once again praising the Democrats for this little bit of a bone they have thrown to you, while you are desperately trying to reach for that bone, keep in mind that Leftists have their other hand in your back pocket, reaching for your wallet and legislating all of your other freedoms away that you take for granted-- naively believing they will always be there. I hope you can live with yourselves and sleep at night. I couldn't." This little bone they have thrown to you now provides you with the opportunity to say, "See! The Democrats care about us!" It provides the Democrats the opportunity to say, "We've thrown them a bone--we can now count on their continued support for our rag-tag constituencies to be held in check." The game continues and your other freedoms continue to shrink.

Free your mind, your neck, and your other freedoms and learn once an for all that you must be treated as a free individual first. Your freedom resides in Conservatism and Classical Liberalism--and as much as you may despise the thought--that places you on the right side of the political spectrum. Allow yourself the decency, respect, and self-esteem you deserve!

Report: Rush Limbaugh taken to Hawaii hospital

2009-12-30T23:33:00.000-05:00

Report: Rush Limbaugh taken to Hawaii hospital

Hey Rush! You are a great thinker and philosopher my friend and I owe many of my debating skills to you! You are a great American and fighter of the tyrannical Left! You truly understand the nature of the free individual--the foundation upon which this country was built. When I first came out as a gay man, prior to forming my political identity and when I still believed most of what I was told by the gay Left about Conservative talk radio, I never would have caught myself listening to you! However, once I opened my ears and mind I realized you weren't what they all said you were--I was hooked. Even though I may not agree with you regarding traditional marriage I learned to respect your position...even realizing that your view on traditional marriage doesn't stem from homophobia. On everything else you and I are sympatico! You are in my prayers and I hope you feel better soon!

Men In Black (and Red)

2009-12-29T23:03:00.000-05:00

I actually heard a Democratic "strategist" on Hannity admonish Republicans on the panel for calling the death-care bill "socialist". I have a question. Exactly at what point will Democrats admit their socialist / commie tendencies? Do you really think Americans are this stupid? We have history that teaches us the signs to watch for. And I'll be the first to admit that Republicans are guilty of promoting the growth of government too! I mean...for you to succeed in making us believe you're not socialists you would have to use those memory-erasing devices from Men in Black to erase our historical memories just as they were used on people in the movie to make them forget they saw an alien. Do you all know how stupid you sound? Why is it you look stunned when people call you stupid and brain-dead? Really!? If you were honest about what you believe I could actually stomach you and maybe even have an ounce of respect for you. I would still fight your asses because you're still wrong--but, I might at least be able to respect you! No matter how sweetly a government, any government, tries to control outcomes--it always ends up the same way...tyranny!

We have a government with their fingers in the banks and car companies. Our health insurance system is in the mess it is in because the government has prevented competition of these companies across state lines. How ridiculous is it that we have thousands of insurance companies in this country and yet...in most states you can only choose from a handful! And you wonder why premiums are what they are? Not to mention the abusive law-suits which need to be addressed! Don't even get me started on housing! Fannie and Freddie? Forcing banks to make loans to people who couldn't pay them back because "everyone deserves to own a home". That's "compassionate" after all. Under that line of thinking everyone deserves a car, clothing, and food as well!

So, at what point mon cherie do you call it socialist? Only once we're fully entrenched in full-blown communism / fascism? Well, of course! Because by then it would be too late for any of us to do anything about it...right?

We Had to Reach This Point...Why?

2009-12-17T15:14:00.004-05:00

This video, not to mention the other lies that have been exposed about global warming, are precisely the reason why I have denigrated, demeaned, and refused to join in with anyone even remotely promoting this silliness over the last decade. Business owners have fallen for it by joining with governmental legislation rather than rejecting it. Simply stated, business owners have no balls when it comes to standing up to governmental stupidity. If business owners would join together in a massive effort to reject the government sticking their noses into their businesses in the first place--we wouldn't need to get to this point.

If I had my way--every business owner in this country would be required to read and learn about Objectivism and "Atlas Shrugged" before even being allowed to open a business.

There's a huge difference between common sense care of the environment and promoting (whether by your silence or deliberate acceptance) collectivist, communist, fascist policies as promoted through the government. The only place all of this silliness is going to lead all of us is down the road to the poor-house.

The fools on the Left hate capitalism--because in their little minds they envision a world covered in concrete, parking lots, and massive retail stores--where no green grass ever shows its head again. Any person with an ounce of sense in their brain understands that capitalism, when left-alone, will inevitably find ways to be environmentally friendly on it's own. We can already see this in the rise of the internet and the ability to do our shopping online rather than running out to your nearest mall. Eventually--this my even take away the need for physcial stores all together. Not only that--but, travel by car will be limited to those malls as well! Oh...those evil exhaust fumes!

Governmental bodies and agencies can't tell developing nations--not to develop.

The only thing Leftists do by promoting their war against capitalism is forcing the market to take that much longer in making those things better--which is why Leftists--are idiots.

Gay Marriage: What Does the Gay Community Want Anyway?

2009-12-04T22:53:00.002-05:00

I think it is high time we start answering that question. Yesterday, GayPatriot posted an entry asking this very same question...and the discussion that followed, I felt, was quite productive and enlightening. Myself, B. Daniel Blatt of GayPatriot, and ThatGayConservative (Steve) from GayConservative.org jumped into the discussion along with a number of others. I wanted to re-post this because I think it is important for this conversation to be read, considered, and analyzed if our community wants to make gains. Of course, maybe we don't, in an underlying way, want to make gains and are sabotaging ourselves...as you'll see when reading the exchange.

Why Gay Groups Need New Leadership

I truly believe that the gay community, rightly so due to some of the attacks that have come from the right over the decades, have taken a hands off approach to the issue of faith, however, our Founders understood faith was an important element of freedom. If the gay community wants to make in-roads that are not based in Marxist philosophy and the destruction of the very society they say they want recognition from--then it's time we pull our heads out of our butts.

Obama Ecstasy Pills Hit the Streets!

2009-12-03T13:14:00.000-05:00

Obama Ecstasy Pills Hit the Streets! *

Obama Zombies--are you tired and worn down. Is your Obama buzz beginning to wear off? Has he started to disappoint you that we're not out of Afghanistan and Iraq? Are you bummed that Obama hasn't sent you your check from the money he confiscated from those evil rich people? Still sitting in your parent's basement wondering where you next joint will come from? Are conservatives killing your Statist buzz with all of their talk about personal responsibility and capitalism? Are you tired of conservatives constantly making a fool out of all your ideas that were dreamt up out of a stoned haze and you know, if just given the right amount of dictatorial power, you could bring about that Utopia that is just out of reach? Is Sarah Palin just irritating you to no end with all of her "common man" appeal?

Well...do we have a pill for you! Take one of these little suckers and we'll have you back up and buzzing in no time! This...will...completely...lay you out baby! That's right! Take one and you can retreat back into the deep dark recesses of your Utopian mind! Our little pill will have you feeling so good and in such an Obama buzzed state that conservatives will never be able to kill your buzz again!

*See your local drug dealer for details. Obama Ecstasy Pills are not responsible for losses of jobs, sanity, or freedom...and we're legally stacked for lawsuits...so, don't try it!

Shhh! Never Criticize Another Republican!

2009-12-02T14:38:00.006-05:00

Ummm...sorry. This classical liberal / conservative doesn't play that game.

It becomes more and more clear to most Americans that the Democrat Party has been taken over by the psychologically disabled and unabashed Marxists. I know that's rather redundant since Marxists are psychologically disabled...but, I digress. This leads me to finally say, "I TOLD YA SO!"

No...seriously. I will criticize Republicans. Hell, they have the biggest opportunity in ages to squash the Democrat Party and all the fool-hardy bullshit coming out of it and thus far--they haven't taken it! The entire Tea Party movement, 9/12 Project, and the numerous other organizations haven't been organized by the Republican Party and they have completely sprouted from Americans themselves. The pathetic Republican Party led by Michael Steele can't even claim responsibility for that!

I, for one, have huge expectations should conservatives be able to get hold of the Republican Party again (as opposed to the Marxists Progressives that have poisoned it). I expect, at a minimum, the following efforts:

1) Restoration of Federalism--state's rights.

2) Work towards a complete separation of the state and the economy with the educated movement to back up that separation and a complete explanation of why the Left uses the divisive tactics of class warfare. I know longer will accept the inter-mingling of the economy and the government. Capitalism is what it is and needs no help from politicians to work--it works quite well on it's own--when left alone. Ayn Rand's economic ideas need to become the basis for America's future economic policies.

3) At some point, a full audit of the Federal Reserve. I'm not so sure I wouldn't like to see the complete elimination of the Federal Reserve--but, barring that--I'll settle for the audit.

4) A movement towards term limits on all Senators and House Members. I'm tired of looking at Barney Frank's puss...and he's an idiot who gives a bad name to gay men and women with two brain cells to rub-together. Our Founders never meant our politicians to make a career out of government. The whole purpose of getting our leaders from the private sector and then sending them back when they were done was precisely so they wouldn't start legislating things that they themselves were not subject too. I mean really? Isn't that why we ultimately fought the Revolution? We now have a political class who have replaced the King of England!

5) A massive cut of all unessential bureaucracy and a concerted effort at either eliminating them entirely or at the very least making them more efficient and transparent so the public can make sure the politicians aren't playing ponsi-scheme games with their money.

6) I want our leaders to abide by the same laws they create for the rest of us. If this healtchare debacle bill isn't good enough for the Bolshevik bitch in charge of the House--then its not good enough for the rest of us either. Yes Nancy! I'm talking about you--you psychotic nut-bag!

7) I want the Federal Government out of the school system. Schools should be funded only by the very people who are using a particular school. Get the federal government out and allow them to be controlled by the States. What's good for a student in California is not necessarily good for a student in Maine.

8) An effort at eliminating all federal funding for scientific progress that has serious ethical considerations attached to it. Citizens of good conscience should not be forced to have their tax dollars funding something they disagree with from a moral and ethical perspective. Let these scientists figure out other ways to get their research funded.

9) A concerted effort at eliminating entangling alliances with organizations such as the U.N. and other entities that don't have our best interests at heart.

10) Border enforcement and a new or revised immigration policy that works. No more illegals. If the Democrat Party needs to get more votes and slaves by pandering to people who don't even live in this country they'll have to find them somewhere else. Yes, I know--the Republicans tried to cram amnesty down our throats too...but, you get my point.

I'm not naive enough to believe all this will happen overnight. But, I want Republicans to start promoting the above, speaking about the above, staying connected with Americans on how to make all of the above happen. I want my leaders on the right side of the aisle to promote all of the above with the same zeal with which the Left promotes socialism and communism. If you don't--I will criticize you and I will work to throw your asses out of office. I'm tired of conservatives and classical liberals not promoting our ideas as voraciously as the Left promotes their "so-called ideas". I will no longer accept Republicans who, for the purposes of getting re-elected, create more programs to make more people dependent. Dependency and slavery is the Left's hallmark. Freedom is the Right's hallmark. Start acting like it!

Americans will stay behind you if you do the right thing and continue to do the right thing! There must somehow be a massive slash of the size of the government as it now stands--so that people actually get to FEEL what the restoration of that freedom is like--almost immediately! If they don't feel it they will remain in their ignorance!

Conflicted by Their Own Hand

2009-12-01T23:56:00.000-05:00

Hello everyone!

My apologies! I was away for a couple of weeks with no access to a computer. Heee's baaaack! (a la Poltergeist). I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving.

Rich Lowry discusses Obama's conflicted troubles in his latest article.

"Barack Obama, Conflicted Commander-in-Chief"

A friend of mine on Facebook said to me recently (and I'm paraphrasing) that he has noticed that many of the liberals he had spoken with before 2008 were demanding our troops be pulled out...NOW! They said we were breeding more terrorists. Obama ran as an anti-war candidate and now that he's in office the same people are telling my friend that we can't just pull out now--it would be chaos if we left. If we left then these countries would turn into breeding grounds for terrorists.

My friend observed that now that their guys in office--suddenly there is a terrorist threat; they're so committed to not being wrong that these liberals are willing to trade in their "principles".

I told my friend that this shouldn't be surprising. It should be no surprise that Obama is conflicted. It should be no surprise that any liberal is ever conflicted. My friend understands Leftism very well--he's Libertarian. However, I told him that they really weren't trading in their principles--Leftism has no principles.

Even with the abortion debate you can see it. Now...I'm not for legislating morality, however, you hear from Liberal Lefty women all the time, "Well, of course no one WANTS to have an abortion." Okay--so, you're admitting this isn't necessarily a healthy thing to do both emotionally and physically--but, you'll still get up in arms when Conservatives would like to do even just minor things that would help young women from finding themselves in that position in the first place?

The Left is truly intellectually vapid and void of any reason. I truly do believe, as some have stated, that its a mental inversion. And Leftism really isn't based on any "principles"--it's based on emotion and like little kids they throw temper tantrums when confronted with facts that break down those emotional walls.

I always say there are deliberate Leftists (those who know what they're doing--and do it intentionally) and Leftists who just don't honestly know any better and if they did---wouldn't be Leftists.

You see the same thing with the Deathcare debate too. For decades Leftist women told our government to keep their hands of their bodies. Now though--it appears when the goverment tells them when to get a breast exam or a pap smear--possibly delaying things long enough to be harmful...it's okay! There is just no intellectual consistency with these people.

As you can see--liberals have only themselves to blame for being conflicted. It is their own misunderstanding of history, the nature of humanity, and the ever present desire to bring about Utopia on earth that hinders their own hand. But, they never learn...do they? What kills me is...they can learn--because I did! I wasn't always a libertarian conservative. They just refuse to learn. Education is the Leftist's worst enemy.

Two Gay Men from HillBuzz Apologize to President Bush

2009-11-12T16:51:00.000-05:00

I would like to thank Tammy Bruce for bringing this blog post to my attention. It was written by the two owners who happen to be two gay men.

Thank you former President George W. Bush and former First Lady Laura

They do seem to write a bi-partisan blog. Even though my own blog is written from Conservative and Classically Liberal viewpoints I vehemently criticize the Republican Party when it becomes necessary to do so--as it so often is these days. The party lost its way under President Bush and it needs a good Conservative kick in the ass. While I always praised President Bush for his leadership after 9/11 and for making it known, unapologetically, where he stood on Islamo-Fascism--he grew the government and was too damn Progressively liberal which in turn led to this Marxist disaster we now have in the White House. John McCain would have been better perhaps on foreign policy issues, however, he still made it known that he believed in the same government growing, wealth-redistribution policies such as the global warming fiasco that the rest of the Marxists embrace.

I have read some praise of the Clintons on their blog. I have never understood the defense of these two people. President Clinton only censored himself because he was forced to after the Republicans took control of the Congress two years into his administration. Prior to that, and for reasons which I can't figure out, people seem to forget the Clintons were trying to ram the same health care disaster down our throats. If Hillary had won this last election with this same Democrat Congress I am convinced she would still be trying to get socialized medicine passed. She would try to be slightly less obvious about it--but, she would still attempt to do it. That is what Progressivism is. It is the slow push of our society down a collectively Leftist road--which is completely unacceptable and anti-thetical to individual freedom. All of the collectivism which has been forced onto our Constitutional limited government since Wilson and F.D.R. not only needs to be fought against vehemently--but, needs to be reversed and undone. And, I'm sorry, but the Democrat Party seeks to continue their assault and I simply will not support it in any fashion.

So, while I disagree with the assumption that the Clintons wouldn't be doing the same thing in a less obvious fashion--I DO agree with these gentlemen on their apology.

Thank you both!

Hasan & Gyrations of Deceit

2009-11-09T18:20:00.001-05:00

The Fort Hood tragedy has brought to the forefront discussions of political correctness and the damaging effect it is having on Western Civilization...and more specifically, America. For anyone interested in the origins of political correctness I suggest reading Political Correctness by Philip Atkinson or visit the blog Atlas Shrugs for a comprehensive video called The History of Political Correctness.

I have always defined political correctness as the Left's attempt to control free speech and, hence, the discussion. It is, as some have called it, cultural Marxism. They know they can't win legitimate debate. They must engage in force or deception of some sort to create what they need to get their agenda passed. It is the deliberate blurring of what Ayn Rand called "objective reality"; that which is...is. A is A. She outright rejected the notion that an individual or groups of individuals can invent or create a reality of their own making without coercing other individuals which we know is the definition of tyranny. She was also an atheist since she rejected religion as an obstacle put in front of an individual that prevents them from seeing or dealing with reality as opposed to some spiritual realm. I personally do not believe it is necessary to be an atheist to embrace her philosophy, however, that is a discussion for another time.

Indeed, objective reality is why conservatives are conservatives. We use history as a learning tool. The Left rejects the lessons of history--if they didn't they wouldn't keep pushing Marxist philosophy. We recognize the policies, successful and destructive, of civilizations from the past that have either enhanced or destroyed those societies. We see reality for what it is and we don't engage in deliberate distortions for the sake of trying to win arguments. That is what the Left does. You can tell they do it if you watch their behavior from a distance and during debates. Politicians are another matter entirely--being what they are they lie to get or keep their jobs and that is a phenomenon that infects both sides of the aisle. But, from a philosophical perspective conservatism embraces the truth and reality as it is...not what we would like it to be, hence it rejects tyranny in all of its forms.

This is why I have always stated that this is precisely the reason the Left's assertion that those from the extreme Right of the political spectrum are "Nazis". It is a form of derision in order to intimidate people into shutting up. It could be stated that some...not all...religious conservatives are Theocrats. And then there are, of course, Anarchists who would like to see no government. Neither are in the same category as Nazis. The Nazi Party was the National Socialist Party. It was a Leftist philosophy as all forms of tyranny are (aside from the aforementioned Theocracy or Anarchy). It was entirely on the Left side of the political spectrum. Genunine conservatism is the rejection of ideology; it is not an ideology in and of itself. It can't be.  That is an antithetical statement. What it can be is the preservation of liberty and the civil society through constitutional limited government. Even within that philosophical framework social issues such as women's rights, civil rights, and gay rights can be discussed. The Conservative doesn't necessarily reject change. They reject bad change. Leftism is bad change. Leftism is what has infiltrated fully the Democrat Party and to a lesser degree the Republican Party.

Gyrations of all types are being created by the press and by the Left in an attempt to analyze why Hasan did what he did. "Oh my! What did we to do him? It's George Bush's fault. It's the Right's fault. It's society's fault. It's religious intolerance of Christians towards Muslims"...and on and on. The list is endless. For the Left it is always the fault of someone or something else. Never is responsibility to be placed where it belongs--on the person who engaged in the behavior.  How about...he did it...because he believes in his religious extremism and wants to ram the religious beliefs he holds down the throat of Western Civilization and will kill us if we don't accept it? But, see that would mean he's bad...simply because...he's bad. And the Left just can't accept that--because that is precisely what tears asunder their worldview. There is an excellent article over at Real Clear Politics entitled Fort Hood: Let's Drop the Political Correctness.

Isn't it curious how the Left denounces all sorts of religiosity from people of faith...accept the people of the Islamic faith? That simple fact is the mind of someone who doesn't see that "A" is "A". It is a purposeful invention of their own minds in order to prevent what they view as discrimination. Discrimination is the ability to be able to analyze that something is better or worse than something else. We always think of discrimination as against someone of another faith or of another skin color; as something inherently bad. In its purest form discrimination is simply analysis--the ability to study ones surroundings and come to a rational conclusion. To the Left--discrimination of any kind, in other words critical thought of any kind, is a willful act of discrimination. So, they choose to just completely turn off their minds.

Accept--discrimination is human. It is a natural process and something that is entirely necessary. Discrimination is what prevents one from going down that dark alley at midnight. It is what prevents one from placing a hand on the hot stove. It is what prevents the girl from going on another date with the gentleman she was just out with because he "gave her a bad feeling."

In some cases, willful Leftists know this and they understand what they're doing. Much of the class warfare, racial politics, and divisive attitudes are purposeful in order to further build walls between people and groups of people for the sake of creating divisions the purpose of which is to destroy the constitutional society so they can rebuild it in what they believe to be a Utopian society...which is impossible because humans are imperfect. It is the same mind game which dictators have used throughout the ages to take over their countries. In other cases there are Leftists who have never thought this deeply and if they did they would outright reject that which they have been doing. In some cases it really is just a matter of education. Hence, the domination of our schools by Leftists. They know an educated society remains a free society. Education is the Leftist's biggest enemy.

In conclusion, we as Americans must simply wake up to what is going on and start to reject this willful brainwashing of the Left on ourselves and our children. If it is allowed to continue our society, our freedom, and our civilization simply will not last. Thus far, we have allowed them to drag us entirely too far down this road.  All the mechanisms of the Left are the tools they use with which to infiltrate our society whether it be the global warming myth or socialized medicine (which is Marxism). If we value our freedoms and society I suggest we put aside all the nit-picky things with which the Left has been using to divide us over and join together to beat this effort back. It is imperative for our survival.

Jon Voight & Mark Levin Speeches from Dec. 5th in D.C.

2009-11-07T16:30:00.000-05:00

I Will Go to Prison

2009-11-07T00:31:00.000-05:00

Speaker Pelosi’s Government-Run Health Plan Will Require a Monthly Abortion Premium

PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail

I attended the Tea Party against government run heathcare on Thursday, November 5th. It was an exhilarating experience. Thousands of patriots from all across the country attended. Estimates ranged from 20,000 to 40,000. I was, unfortunately, unable to attend the big rally back on September 12th...and my phenomenal experience on the 5th made me regret my inability to attend that much more intense event. Listening to thousands of people chanting with one common cause--the cause of freedom (unlike the cause of tyranny you hear Leftists chanting for in regimes around the world) brought tears to my eyes. And, just for the record, there were minorities of all sorts there-gay, black--you name it.

Here's why I will go to prison. I absolutely refuse to engage in this healthcare debacle which is going to destroy this country's healthcare system. I will not allow them to force me to participate in it. I will not allow my tax dollars to go towards abortions and Nancy Pelosi can stick her health plan where the sun doesn't shine. If some woman wants to have an abortion...by all means! Be my guest! But, I'll be damned if it is going to be my duty to fund it! If you were stupid enough to get yourself into a situation that you now regret...that is not my problem!

Does anyone else notice that for years Democrats have been telling us that we need to leave women's bodies alone and here were are...about to allow these people enough power over our lives that they will be able to tell us what, when, how, and where we get treatment? Excuse me...last I checked I was a free individual and I have no interest in allowing the Federal Government to know what goes on with my health issues. That's private!

Is it just me? When the hell did we turn into a Banana Republic? She seems to be suffering from some sort of dementia. We live in America where people are allowed to have freedom of choice and are not sent to prison for not complying with the government's wishes.

I'll be damned if I'm going to let these people intimidate me. Send me to prison! You know why? Because that will finally expose the Left for what they are and what they have been wanting to do for ages--which is turn us into the Soviet Union! Hey Nancy! Kiss my gay white ass! Send your goons for me--because I am NOT paying for your Soviet-style healthcare. And just like Hank Rearden in Atlas Shrugged I will make these people expose themselves for what they are and I know many others who will gladly join me in this fight. You will have to come drag me to prison in front of the news media. The world will see that you have turned the land of the free and the home of the brave into another country where people are in chains.

So take your best shot you psychopathic bitch! Come get me!

Awww...Don't Cry Obama!

2009-11-03T20:14:00.052-05:00

McDonnell wins Virginia governorship for GOP

Awww...don't cry Obama. Doesn't he look like he's going to cry in this picture? Well, maybe you should because this is just the beginning of our new American Revolution as opposed to the Marxist Revolution you were hoping to have. We kicked some ass in New Jersey (Christie [R]) and Virginia (McDonnell [R]). We'll give you New York for now. It would be inhumane to punish you that much!

I look forward to joining my fellow patriots in Washington D.C. as we converge there on Thursday to once again kick some Leftist ass.

I know who you are Obama...and that goes for Pelosi and Reid as well. I know what you are. I know what it is that you hide in your hearts from the American people through your double talk, class warfare, race warfare and other divisive tactics. I know that you can't see fit to leave people alone to live their lives for themselves because you don't believe in freedom. You believe in tyranny. You envy the old Soviet Union, Mussolini's Italy, Chavez's Venezuela. You envy them because that is what you are in your heart--a tyrant! You can't even call yourselves liberals anymore! You call yourselves "Progressives". It's all the same tyrannical crap wearing a different color dress. Well, we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore and we're going to shove that travesty of a health care bill where the sun doesn't shine!

I think we have entirely too many people who vote Democrat in this country because they take exception to the conservative views of faith, family, and economic freedom. They're afraid of religion being rammed down their kids throats...or even their throats for that matter. How open minded of them...huh? You know what? Grow the hell up. It is through faith, family, and economic freedom...that we remain free; which is precisely why the Left tries so hard to destroy those things. When you think about it--would you rather have the simple concerns of your kids asking you about something as simple as faith or have a country instead where they no longer have the freedom to be what they want to be or even be able to ask you that question at all because you allowed yourself to be offended?

I'm gay. Family is not alien to me. I hope to have a relationship one day that will be...my family. I may or may not. However, that is in no way contrarian to the conservative and classically liberal views our Founders had. There may be some of faith that need some convincing--but, it is a conversation to be had and I will not join with these Leftists in the misguided notion that I need to drown my country in tyrannical policies in order to get a marriage licence.

We're coming Nancy, Harry, Obama...we're coming and freedom is on the march!

A Warning to All Americans

2009-11-03T11:22:00.002-05:00

This was forwarded to me by a friend on Facebook and I thought it was worthy enough to be shared. Author's name follows:

"We lived in California during the winters of 2007 and 2008. We became addicted to Fox News and watched O'Reilly and Hannity and Colmes every night. When we got back home, we upgraded our cable to get Fox. I watched the Presidential campaign very closely. Initially because I thought the Democrats would nominate Hillary Clinton and then in astonishment when they chose an even more hard-left candidate. All of last year I told everyone I could that Obama was not a Democrat, he was a Marxist. He is far to the left of any European leader and even our far left party, the NDP.

I read Saul Alinsky when I was in the University. I studied him and his writing carefully. When Bill Ayers and his idiot wife were bombing and killing people at random in the Weather Underground. Weather Underground and the Black Panthers were closely allied. I read David Horowitz's account of changing from a Marxist to a conservative after seeing that the government was afraid to prosecute members of the Panthers for murdering his personal assistant. He suddenly understood the evil that Marxism really was.

After the student radicals failed in creating a Marxist revolution in the United States by violent means, they embraced Alinsky.. You would be wise to read "Rules for Radicals" because it outlines how Hillary and Obama planned to get into power, and what they intended to do when they got it.

Socialism is not the correct descriptor for what Obama and the Democrats are doing. They are going to be much more far reaching than anything Sweden has ever been able to do. Obama is following Alinsky's plans, those set out in "Rules for Radicals" and his other writing. The Democrats are attempting to create one party rule in the U.S. and in achieving that, will create crisis after crisis by their own actions and use those crisis to nationalize the means of production in the U.S. You are in the middle of a communist revolution and few in the U.S. can actually see it for what it truly is.

The U.S. is now on the path of financial destruction. The Constitution has been shredded and individual human rights are being trampled. In less than 8 months. Obama has used a recession to take over the two largest industries in the U.S. He will debase the Dollar and is on the road to creating an incredible energy shortage that will allow him and Congress to take over the energy industry.

But by and large I think that by the 2010 elections, the Democrats will have gerrymandered electoral districts to the point that it will be impossible for them to lose control of both houses of Congress. The incredible increase in the money supply is going to create Zimbabwe and Venezuela style inflation, and with it, controls on the currency and the amount of money that can be taken out of the country.

I love America , I cannot believe how the ignorance of the American public has created a situation where by they are going to lose their Republic and slip into an age of repression and tyranny.

I may be nuts, but so far I have been 100% in my predictions of what Obama was going to do, because I merely had to look at "Rules for Radicals" to see what was coming next.

I read Glenn Beck's book, "Common Sense" and in it re-read Thomas Paine's pamphlet with the same name. I recommend the book.

When the storm finally hits (and it will), those of you who supported the Obama administration will be affected as well. It won't just be us gun owners or Flat-Taxers, or Pro-Lifers that get hit. You'll be right there next to us.

You all thought the Conservatives were nut cases. You know, all of us who believe in God, small government, the Second Amendment, etc. You thought you could just go back to sleep after the election was over. In your world, America will continue as before. You'll still have the same rights, the same nice house, the same big screen television. After all, your high school football team won and the other team lost "go team"! Even if you have bothered to look up from the daily grind since Nov 4th, you dismissed everything that has occurred as "politics as usual"the same old stuff.

In the end, it'll all be OK won't it? Not this time.

There are a growing number of citizens in the US that are ready to fight to shut down the government's grab of personal freedom, it's blatant abuse of the constitution, and it's attempt to replace the American way of life with socialism. You have to listen carefully to hear them, but they are there. I won't start that fight, but when it goes down I will join it.

As for you, why, you'll be shocked because you didn't see it coming. And eventually you'll be saddened when you see that we have truly lost the way of life with which you grew up. You'll be saddened that your children and grandchildren live in a socialist, government-controlled gulag where their every movement from cradle to grave is tracked by the government. But most of all, you'll be saddened by the death of friends and relatives who are brave enough to fight and die for something they believe in.

You know, McCain wasn't much of a candidate. I'll give you that. He was the lesser of two evils for most of us. I don't blame you for not voting for him since, at the time, you didn't know what we all know now. But at least John McCain was an American. He was a supporter of the American way of life and he understood that you can't negotiate with terrorists. He understood and appreciated the sacrifice made by my father and other members of the Greatest Generation.

Mark my words friends. All across America groups are forming. They are forming out of anger and out of desperation at the thought of losing America . They're not militia groups, terrorists as the Department of Homeland security would have you believe; they are Americans, loyal to the constitution. They are mothers and fathers and grandparents. They belong to groups like the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps, the Peaceful Resistance, the Constitution Party, the Young Conservatives, the 9/12 Project, and Grassfire. Right now they are fragmented, each focused on their own cause. But sometime in the next two years, our government is going to do something really stupid and these groups will come together. Watch for it, wait for it's get ready. It will happen.

When that event happens, whatever "it" is, our great country is going to plunge into chaos for a while. I pray to God that we make it through that time and emerge a stronger, smarter country."

Naval Aviator, Commander

Jerry Wilson, jerrywilson@centurytel.net

"Live Free or Die Fighting."

"This is a time to be looking UP. And to be praying."

New Jersey,...California, New York

2009-11-02T16:20:00.000-05:00

Duncan Currie's article The Swamps of Jersey: How the Garden State fell into decline discusses, as he puts it, the hemorrhaging of human capital from New Jersey to other states where individuals are economically free...hence, free as our Founders viewed freedom.

California and New York suffer from the same illness. "But, Chris," the libnut says, "California has a Republican governor!" Yes. However, he's also dealing with Leftists in the legislature...and as we found out with President Bush--just because there is an "R" in front of the name doesn't make one a Conservative!

The lessons all Americans should learn from "human capital hemorrhaging" from the states is that [modern] liberal economic policies are Leftist economic policies--which translates into POVERTY FOR EVERYONE!!!...accept the political class. When you overtax businesses, large or small, they will simply move elsewhere--overseas if necessary. I guess the long-term goal of the Leftist is that eventually they will control the entire planet then moving will no longer do anyone any good.

Accept the flaw in that theory demands small groups of people or nation states would, if necessary, fight wars to free themselves from that tyranny. No one said the Left was intelligent though to think that far ahead. Even certain states in this country have movements discussing secession. People will always fight for their individual liberty--which is why Utopia will never be possible.

It is time all Americans stood up against Leftist Democrats and (fake Republicans) and said enough with the economic redistribution. We know what Communism is and that is not what this country was founded on. If you want to live in Communism...then YOU are the one that needs to move--not the rest of us who cherish our freedom.

George Soros...get the HELL out!

Illusion--Always Better Than Reality for Leftists

2009-10-31T01:18:00.000-04:00

"Here too, it seems as if so many people have invested so much hope and trust in Barack Obama that it is intolerable that anyone should come along and stir up any doubts that could threaten their house of cards.

Among the most pathetic letters and e-mails I receive are those from people who ask why I don't write more 'positively' about Obama or 'give him the benefit of the doubt.'

No one-- not even the President of the United States-- has an entitlement to a 'positive' response to his actions. The entitlement mentality has eroded the once common belief that you earned things, including respect, instead of being given them."

Thomas Sowell nailed it. The hope and change mantra resonated for so many people...many that did not see, either because they did not want to see or chose not to see, Barack Obama for what he is--a Leftist radical who has definitive designs on bringing this nation to its knees. If he can he has already made it known that he will sign a global treaty that will essentially neuter the United States Constitution and give foreign leaders a say over how we choose to run our affairs. This will be the last nail in the coffin of our Constituion and our way of life.

Here is hoping that enough Americans have been awakened from their politically correct slumber; enough who still understand what it means to be free.

Yet, even as I say that--I'm not so sure. Freedom requires personal responsiblity. We have, over the decades, completely absolved our children of any idea that the things they do are their responsibility. Both good and bad. Many of us even suffer from this ourselves to varying degrees. The idea of consequences has been bred out of them by Leftists who can only get their agenda rammed down the throats of freedom loving people by breeding those hard lessons out of society. And I admit...for right now they seem to have done a pretty good job of achieving that very thing. Every kid gets a trophy, losing hurts too much so score is no longer kept because "their are no losers."

There is a reason for the vehement way in which the Left defends Barack Obama and his actions. People who criticize him are ripping at the curtain behind which the Wizard hides. Your are threatening their Utopia when you break him down under the harsh light of reality and begin taking his actions, lies and true intentions apart piece by piece. It is not unlike an individual being shaken out of the mental constructs built to shield them from a traumatic event by a psychologist.

Many of America's problems are simply the result of the infringement of this mass psychosis upon us by the Left. They have done it through the schools (high school or college), media, movies, music, books and many other venues.

The solution for getting America back to the beacon of freedom it was meant to be will not be easy; it will take all of us. I'm afraid there will be no spoonful of sugar to help this medicine go down any easier. It is tough to hear--but, admitting the problem is half the battle. Collectively, as a nation we must admit to the addiction and get the help we need. Otherwise, we may as well just tear up our founding documents, throw in the towel and call it a day...or two centuries.

A Clown?

2009-10-29T21:18:00.000-04:00

After hearing that Matthews Compares 'Torture Man' Cheney to Hussein Brothers ...it brought back the voices of so many that have criticized Chris Matthew's for being a clown.

Yes...I would agree. He is a clown. But pull in your arms and legs girls and boys because he might just drag

you down into the sewer where he will make you part of his afternoon snack!

This man and others like him in the Leftist (notice I didn't say Liberal) media are going to destroy themselves eventually; just as Liberal (Leftist) talk radio has done. The reason radio shows like Air America and other Liberal (Leftist) radio shows don't do well...is simply because they can't keep an audience. The American people know tyranny and a philosophy that is a lie when they hear it; thus they reject it. The Leftist media on television are now experiencing the same phenomena as they continue to plummet in the ratings.

The idea that Dick Cheney has anything remotely in common with the Hussein brothers is mindless, morally relativistic thought masquerading for real commentary. The Hussein brothers killed, maimed, and tortured political opponents. A government protecting its citizens from attacks from foreign enemies and invaders is an entirely different scenario. This is the typical Leftist tactic; elevate evil to pull down good hoping that everything can meet in the middle to achieve the ever unattainable Utopia.

Chris Matthews is a clown...and a jackass to boot! Perhaps he should find a job in the circus.

Lollipops and Unicorns

2009-10-28T21:51:00.000-04:00

Michael Tanner's article Dems' Health Plans vs. Common Sense states:

"At the core of the president's proposal is the idea that he can provide more health care services to more people and have it cost less. A neat trick - but one that flies in the face of economic reality, not to mention common sense."

Of course it flies in the face of economic reality. Just as everything Leftists do flies in the face of reality. Humanitarian motives, those used by liberals for the justification of their policies, are fine--however, the one thing they never tell you is that their political motives (tyranny) are even greater. These efforts by Leftists go even deeper than just a pure lack of common sense; if it was that easy they could actually be educated out of their stupidity. Their motives are political. It has nothing to do with humanitarianism. If it did have anything to do with humanitarianism they would not have such a problem with our military freeing people in other nations from the hard hand of their tyrannical dictators.

Hard-core Leftists have deeply ingrained in them this sense that man is ultimately good and if that "ultimate goodness" can just be manipulated in the right way then government can save us from all of our problems. The basic flaw in that reasoning, however, is that man is not ultimately good; man is ultimately flawed with many good people out there. Therein lies the difference. And even good people have their flaws as we all do. That is precisely why Leftist policies always end in horror, economic turmoil, genocide or worse.

Their are many in the politically elite Leftist class who know and understand this. Even though they understand it they choose to ignore it for their own selfish reasons--would that selfishness be one of those ultimate flaws I mentioned in the previous paragraph? Yes it would. Conservatism is the mind switch that allows you to understand that Leftism leads to those bad things and that there are ways to find solutions to problems without stepping on someone else's liberty.

The quest for lollipops and unicorns never leads to lollipops and unicorns.

Addendum to Previous Post

2009-10-23T16:50:00.000-04:00

I just wanted to mention that the exclusion of certain Republicans that appear to be "getting it" in my previous post was intentional. There are good men and women out there that I did not mention for a variety of reasons at this point. My sole concentration was intended for those who do not appear to be "getting it".